The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-11901, in the name of Roseanna Cunningham, on developing Scotland’s young workforce. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now, but I advise that speeches are now likely to be of five minutes’ duration.
I call Roseanna Cunningham to speak to and move the motion. Cabinet secretary—you have a maximum of 13 minutes.
15:23
This debate is an opportunity to set out the Government’s new youth employment strategy and its full response to the report from the commission for developing Scotland’s young workforce.
Members will remember that, in June, Sir Ian Wood and his commission presented a coherent, practical and powerful set of ideas about what more needs to be done to align our education system firmly, and more fully, with the needs of the economy.
Angela Constance, the then Cabinet Secretary for Training, Youth and Women’s Employment, presented our initial response to Parliament in June. We said that we shared without exception the commission’s ambitions for young people, employment and prosperity in Scotland.
On the publication of their report, Sir Ian and his commission were clear about their recommendations. However, they were equally certain that we already had many of the building blocks in place: the strong regional college system, the undeniable success of Scotland’s modern apprenticeship programme and, with curriculum for excellence, a long-term national plan for success in our schools.
As Sir Ian recognised, we are already going in the right direction. Against the background of recession and continued Westminster austerity, our strategy for developing Scotland’s young workforce is delivering. Recent employment statistics for Scotland have been encouraging—we have record numbers of people in work. Youth unemployment in Scotland is at a five-year low and Scotland is outperforming the United Kingdom as a whole in the youth employment and youth inactivity rates; indeed, yesterday’s figures from Skills Development Scotland confirm that there are now record numbers of Scottish school leavers achieving positive destinations, so we start from an already strong foundation. However, we know that we have to do more.
We want to tackle long-term issues in the labour market, and barriers to young women and men getting into jobs. Earlier this year, we said that we would be able to increase the annual number of new modern apprenticeship starts, taking the number to 30,000 a year by 2020.
The First Minister has already said that within our schools it is also our priority to increase attainment for all, and in the weeks and months ahead, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning will take forward a programme to do just that. The equation is simple. If we drive up attainment for all in our schools, we will improve the prospects of all our young people as they enter the workplace.
We have set ambitious targets for our young workforce. Our long-term youth employment strategy is designed ultimately to reduce youth unemployment by 40 per cent by 2021. In each of the next seven years, we will provide a report on progress towards that target. By any measure, that represents a radical reduction on the current position. It will put us where we belong—among the best-performing countries in Europe. We know that that is within our grasp.
We need to focus as never before on aligning our education system more firmly, and for the longer term, with the needs of the economy, and we need a renewed focus on employability within education. Sir Ian’s report demands no less than a culture change from all parts of the education system, from employers and from young people themselves, as well as from those who influence them.
Above all, our seven-year programme will be a collaborative effort. Government cannot do this on its own, which is why our programme has been developed in conjunction with our partners in local government and with Scotland’s employers and trade unions, as well as with our schools and colleges.
I thank the cabinet secretary for giving way. I very much agree with the sentiments of her remarks. When she gets on to how the allocation of moneys will be provided across the different agencies that she has just mentioned, will she take into account issues for rural and island areas, where the unit numbers—in other words, pupil numbers—are smaller and therefore the costs can be greater in delivering the very recommendations that I am sure she is going to come on to describe?
I thank Tavish Scott for his intervention. Of course, I am conscious that we are now well into the financial year 2014-15. However, it is worth highlighting again that local government has been a full partner in developing the plans, which are now very well developed, so it should be making clear which local priorities and actions require the additional investment. That is something that Tavish Scott may wish to consider. My officials are currently working with their counterparts in the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to establish the allocation of the local government funding, and they are taking into account factors including deprivation, rurality and appropriate adjustments for the islands, which is a very key issue. If Tavish Scott is happy with that answer at this stage, I will be happy to speak to him again in more detail as the situation develops and perhaps as he becomes aware of more detailed information.
That is a good point at which to move on to resources in general. In June, we said that we would be providing the resources to kick-start the whole programme. We made an initial £12 million available for implementation of the programme in the financial year 2014-15, and we have committed a further £16.6 million in the 2015-16 draft budget. Clearly, we also need to think about funding across the education and training system over that period. In the Wood commission report, there was a call for greater collaboration in use of resources. That is why we will continue to look to all our partners to test new approaches and work together to build capacity across the system and to improve outcomes for Scotland’s young people. That, again, is what Sir Ian’s report recommended.
Today, I am pleased to set out not only our strategy, but how local government intends to use the funds that we are allocating to it. We have agreed with local government a package of £6.5 million in 2014-15 to support its contribution to implementation. Since local authorities are at different stages of developing their specific proposals, the deployment of funding from that package will necessarily vary from area to area—a point that Tavish Scott has, in a sense, already made.
Broadly speaking, the funding will support the development of vocational and career pathways for young people, the enhancement of STEM—science, technology, engineering and mathematics—opportunities and training, and the engagement of schools with parents and carers regarding the new opportunities on offer. It will support a review of work experience to make it relevant to the needs of young people and local labour markets and it will support further development of modern apprenticeships. It will also support action to tackle inequality by ensuring that opportunities are open to all, and that vulnerable groups are supported into positive destinations. I know that many members will wish to comment on that last aspect.
I am greatly encouraged by what the cabinet secretary has said. With regard to STEM subjects, has the Government given any thought to discussions with local authorities on heeding the call for dedicated science teachers in primary schools?
I rather expect that my colleague who is in charge of the education portfolio will want to take that forward.
As it happens, my colleague Annabelle Ewing and I have been speaking to a number of people about what happens in schools in particular, and those issues need to be looked at carefully. We need to ensure that schools are making available all opportunities to the maximum number of pupils right from the start, and that opportunities are not closed off to young people because of lack of awareness, as much as anything else.
On schools specifically, Sir Ian Wood and his commission noted the progress that we are making with curriculum for excellence, which is now firmly embedded as the way we do education in Scotland. It has moved away from a narrow focus, and is about preparing young people to be adaptable, flexible and resilient lifelong learners. As Sir Ian noted, it provides us with the best possible foundation from which to close the attainment gap, and from which to better prepare our young people for the world of work. I know that Liz Smith and her colleagues are concerned about that.
Along with our schools, Scotland’s college sector is already responding positively to Sir Ian’s recommendations. The Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council is already, together with local authorities, schools and others, supporting seven college regions to develop senior phase vocational pathways so that young people in the senior phase of school are better supported into the world of work.
Colleges and schools have been working collaboratively for several years, and pilots are building on the success of what has gone before. Pilots are now in place in Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire, Dumfries and Galloway, Edinburgh, Fife, Central, Glasgow and West Lothian, and they are reaching out to more young people and helping them to make positive choices about their careers. The pilots are strengthening vital links between school, college, university and employment for 15 to 18-year-old secondary school students.
Crucially, all college regional outcome agreements will from the academic year 2015-16 contain clear statements that outline colleges’ contributions to senior phase vocational pathways in their regions.
Employers are vital too, and I warmly welcome the support that we have had from the business community for Sir Ian’s recommendations on how we can improve employer engagement. Scotland’s businesses have already come forward, and we have been able to establish the national invest in young people group. It is chaired by Rob Woodward, who is the chief executive of STV, and initial funding has been made available to establish regional groups. Those groups will be important in the future in delivering fair access and in engaging people at local level.
Work is also under way on development of a new standard for work experience, which Sir Ian’s report identified as an area for early improvement, and which young people have identified as a priority. Developing young people’s understanding of the world of work is also central to foundation apprenticeships. In Fife, 50 pupils from five secondary schools are already working towards engineering foundation apprenticeships, and a similar pathfinder scheme is in place in West Lothian. Drawing lessons from those initiatives, we aim to roll out such apprenticeships and drive a change in provision throughout Scotland.
The commission’s report sets out a challenge to us about the scale of inequality. We want more jobs, and better jobs, for our young people. However, because of the UK Government’s discriminatory regulations, some of our young workers could receive less than £3 an hour. No one, no matter what age they are, should be working for less than £3 an hour, so I call on Westminster to align the rates for apprentices with the other higher bands of the national minimum wage. We would like to go further with the living wage, but as a bare minimum we must end the shockingly low minimum wage that apprentices can currently face.
We will tackle all the barriers that our young people face in getting a fair deal in the workplace; tackling occupational segregation must be a priority. We cannot view it as acceptable that so many young women choose not to follow up study of maths, science, technology and engineering simply because they consider that to be training for a boy’s job.
The proportion of women who have benefited from the MA programme may have increased from 27 per cent to 41 per cent, but we are still falling short. There are cultural factors that we will need to address if we are to harness the talents of all our young people, regardless of their background. That is why our implementation plans contain specific measures to address those factors and to reduce workforce inequalities among all our young people.
I take the point that Jayne Baxter made in the chamber last week about the particular difficulties that young disabled people can face. Whatever difficulties or barriers stand in front of our young people, we have a duty to ensure that there is a way ahead and that they can all benefit from the opportunities, which is why we are funding a number of local pilot projects on that across Scotland. Where there is evidence of good work locally, we will expect that to inspire and inform practice across Scotland.
Last month, when the First Minister set out the Government’s programme, she said that we will focus on working
“in the interests of all those whom we serve.”—[Official Report, 26 November 2014; c 19.]
Above all, it will be our mission to create a fairer and more prosperous nation. Under this Government, wealth and inclusion must always go hand in hand. With our implementation plans and refreshed strategy, we will support our young people better for employment. Each of us in Parliament, in common with our constituents and citizens all over Scotland, has a stake in supporting our young people into the workforce. Our approach is to engage as many partners and stakeholders as want to participate in that endeavour. I take great pride in leading the agenda on behalf of the Scottish Government.
I move,
That the Parliament endorses the ambitions set out in the Commission for Developing Scotland’s Young Workforce report, Education Working for All!; notes the progress made in reducing youth unemployment in Scotland since the publication of Scotland’s youth employment strategy; recognises that there is more to do in tackling youth unemployment and improving the number and quality of youth employment opportunities; further recognises that the refreshed strategy must take into account the changing economic conditions, focus attention on supporting young people who need more help to participate in the labour market and address legacy issues from the recession; believes that critical to improving youth employment is a world class vocational education system, providing more opportunities for young people; further believes that this will best be achieved by supporting close working between employers and an education system that is responsive to economic and labour market need, and welcomes the Scottish Government’s implementation plan developed with a broad range of partners, including local government, for reducing youth unemployment and unlocking social mobility as set out in the newly published youth employment strategy.
15:36
Today, 67,000 young people are unemployed. They are young people full of potential, ambition and expectation, but they lack an opportunity. They could be the engineers, welders, nurses, carers and doctors of tomorrow. That is a tragic waste of our young talent. Their plight has to be one of the top priorities of the current Government—or any Government—because, if we want to create the successful and fairer Scotland that the cabinet secretary has spoken about, we have to change direction. We will never create a fair society and economy based on a low-skills, low-pay and zero-hours culture.
I therefore welcome Sir Ian Wood’s report, which is an extensive and thorough piece of work, with 39 recommendations. In the short time that I have, I will pick up on a few of the issues that are raised in it and in the Government’s response. As a former teacher and college lecturer, I fully agree that we need to prepare young people for work at an earlier stage, but I believe that introducing children to different jobs and learning about careers should begin much earlier—I think that it should begin in primary school. Visits to local factories, shops, care homes, hospitals, restaurants and engineering plants help young people to understand what goes on in those workplaces and what people actually do when they go out to work.
School visits by nurses, vets, police officers or chefs give a practical insight into the real lives and careers of people in work. In my time in schools, some of the most influential people who made an impression on the pupils were those who came into school to share their life experiences. However, all of this has to be real. Young people can spot tokenism a mile away, they hate being patronised and they can see through flannel in two seconds, so I hope that we can avoid such an approach.
I share Sir Ian’s desire for vocational education and academic training to be put on the same footing. We desperately need more engineers, construction workers, technicians and information technology specialists. Our schools and colleges have to be aligned seamlessly to provide the qualifications and experience that pupils and students need to build such careers. Of course we need better links between our colleges and schools, but those links have to be meaningful and have to lead to qualifications that are of relevance to the local economy as well as the interests of our young people. There are many good examples of that happening across Scotland but, as the report says, we need to develop those links much further.
There is a lot to be commended in the report, which sets out good intention on quality assurance, regional outcome agreements and partnership working, and some excellent sentiment on equalities. However, there are a number of issues that I have concerns about. The report says that there is a need for “meaningful and effective” careers guidance and that a more “comprehensive standard” is required. Around two years ago, I raised concerns in this chamber about the direction of the careers service. Those concerns have not gone away. I think that the report reflects that.
Similarly, on modern apprenticeships, we previously raised issues about short timescales and the fact that some of them can be completed in three or six months, and we raised concerns about some of the sectors in which modern apprenticeships were being offered and about the level of qualification that was achieved. As I recall, the Government had increased the number of modern apprenticeships at level 2 and decreased the number at level 3, thus inflating the numbers. I think that Sir Ian’s report alludes to that. It says:
“Now is the time to more actively target Modern Apprenticeships towards supporting economic growth and areas of the labour market where the long term prospects of young apprentices are greatest.”
Sir Ian calls for more apprenticeships at level 3 or above, for a rethink of the status and value of apprenticeships and for more routes for progression, and he echoes the criticism that I have consistently made when he says:
“The term Modern Apprenticeships is still applied across the wide variety of different in-work training programmes and there is a case to introduce branding to help … differentiate … levels.”
I agree with that. Just because something is called an apprenticeship, that does not necessarily reflect the public’s perception or the perception of a young person of what it actually entails.
We need to ascertain whether modern apprenticeships are creating secure employment and whether our young people are staying in work on completion. It is my belief that we need a far more thorough evaluation to make sure that modern apprenticeships are fair and non-exploitative and offer value for money and that, most important, they lead to good, secure employment.
The truth is that, at the moment, we simply do not know how good modern apprenticeships are. Audit Scotland said in its recent report:
“The Scottish Government has set various priorities for modern apprenticeships but existing performance measures do not focus on long-term outcomes, such as sustainable employment. This means it is difficult to measure their long-term contribution to national outcomes. More specific long-term aims and objectives, along with information on their benefits and appropriate outcome measures, would make it easier to assess the extent to which modern apprenticeships provide value for money. It would also help direct funding in ways that offer the best value to individuals, employers and the economy.”
I therefore ask the cabinet secretary to confirm whether the Scottish Government intends to act on the advice of Audit Scotland. Is it going to include sustainable employment as a performance measure of the success of the modern apprenticeship programme? I did not see that in the Government’s response. I am happy to give way to the minister if she wants to answer that question just now, or she can respond at the end of the debate. Such a long-term evaluation, going beyond what has been done up until now, will help to inform our thinking about whether modern apprenticeships tackle youth unemployment in a sustainable, long-term way.
On colleges, Sir Ian’s report sets out a range of sensible proposals that we can support, However, of course, all of that is set against the backdrop of the Scottish Government’s policy agenda that has had such a devastating impact on further education in Scotland. Budgets in the sector have been cut by £67 million in real terms between 2011 and 2016; 140,000 student places have been lost, with adult learners, students with learning disabilities and women being most affected; and part-time courses, often the very courses that build confidence and get people back into education, have been cut to the bone. Even in the very group that the Scottish Government has targeted, the under-25s, numbers are falling. There are now nearly 60,000 fewer under-25s at college than there were in 2007-08. That is not a good record. Thousands of lecturing and support jobs have gone and, only last week, we saw that colleges need £14.7 million to meet the level of bursaries that students need, yet only £3.5 million has been awarded—more than £11 million short. So much for supporting students through their education.
That is Mike Russell’s further education legacy. I hope that the new cabinet secretary will immediately change course. If she does, she has our support. If not, the strategy will start with one hand tied behind its back.
Will the member give way?
I am in my last minute, but I will give way if the Presiding Officer will allow it.
Is it not the case that student support is currently at £104 million, which is much in excess of what it was in 2006-07, when the Scottish National Party took office from Labour?
You are in your last 50 seconds, Mr Findlay.
Annabelle Ewing should look at the shortfall of £11 million between what the colleges requested and what was awarded on the SNP’s watch.
The Government’s overall objective is to reduce youth unemployment by 40 per cent by 2021. That would mean that, after 14 years of an SNP Government—God forbid—60 per cent of today’s young unemployed Scots would still be on the dole; 60 per cent would be abandoned without hope. The First Minister often says that our greatest asset is our people, so why does that not appear to apply to all our people? What poverty of ambition that is. What a lack of determination and vision.
Let me say very clearly that we will never give up on our young people. I hope that the Government will reflect on that.
I move amendment S4M-11901.3, to leave out from first “believes” to “market need” and insert:
“believes that any young workforce strategy should make every attempt to ensure that young people in the most deprived and rural areas have equal access to opportunities; calls on the Scottish Government to address the 140,000 places cut from Scotland’s colleges, cuts that have disproportionately affected women, young people and disabled adults from deprived backgrounds; believes that vocational education should be given the same prominence and stature as academic education; recognises that vocational education and training are critical to improving opportunities but that a world class system can only be achieved by appropriately funding Scotland’s colleges; calls on the Scottish Government to tackle the issue of underemployment and promote sustainable, secure and safe employment for young people; further believes that this will best be achieved by joint working between employers, schools, colleges, universities and trade unions in an education and training system that is responsive to economic and labour market need,”.
15:45
I welcome Neil Findlay to his new post of spokesman for fair work, skills and training. If I may say so, he is very well suited to the post.
In the final week in Parliament in this year like no other, I am very pleased to bring some consensus. All of us in the Conservative Party agree with and support the Wood commission’s proposals on vocational education. We support the Government’s motion and, although we tried our hardest, we could not disagree with the content of the Labour amendment.
We hope that both Labour and the SNP will support our amendment, which focuses on employability skills, as discussed in the Wood commission report, and on addressing the deterioration of literacy and numeracy. The Audit Scotland report of June this year stated that 35 per cent of secondary 2 pupils were not working at the expected numeracy level, compared with 2 per cent of primary 7 pupils.
Our amendment also focuses on STEM subjects and on utilising the training, experience and expertise in our FE colleges, where there are excellent examples of partnership with industry.
I want to address something that I feel very passionate about, which is technically known as parity of esteem. I have just as much respect for the skills and qualifications of an electrician, a plumber and a joiner as I do for those of an accountant, a lawyer or a nurse, who are professionals. We need to stop the snobbery that sees an apprenticeship or a trade as somehow less worthy than a degree. Many people who work in the oil industry and other industries in Scotland and abroad earn far more than many people who have been to university, whom we class as professionals. Now that we have a new cabinet secretary, a new team on the Conservative benches and a new team on the Labour benches, can we all agree that we equally value the skills of every person, whether they are builders, gardeners or bricklayers, and not assume that a degree is the only way forward? That got that off my chest.
Mary Scanlon speaks highly of bricklayers. I assure her that she will always have my support for that.
Why does Neil Findlay think that I mentioned bricklayers? I thought that he might like that one.
We need to ask why so many pupils stay on until sixth year at school. Last week, when I visited a school in Inverness I asked how many pupils out of 200 left at the end of fourth year. The answer was seven. I asked what the pupils who remained did for the final two years. Did they all leave with qualifications? The answer that I got was, “Not really.”
The Scottish Parliament information centre confirmed that, in 2007, 76 per cent of pupils stayed on to S5 and 44 per cent stayed on to S6. In 2013, the figures had risen to 86 and 60 per cent respectively. That is fine, provided that the extra years are used to gain qualifications, training and work experience. The essence of the Wood commission report is to ensure that time in school or colleges is productive and enhances work prospects.
Neil Findlay mentioned careers advice, which I am concerned about. Skills Development Scotland is very prominent in our schools, and we need to ask whether pupils—and their parents—are given all the options and opportunities at the end of third year, which is when it should happen, to prepare for the world of work.
This week, all MSPs received the SDS updates for the winter for each council area. I noticed that, for the first six months of this year, SDS provided skills advice to 56 companies in the three constituencies in Highland, which is an average of 18 per constituency. It provided skills advice to seven companies in Orkney and five in the Western Isles. In booming Shetland, with all the opportunities there, SDS managed to provide advice to three companies. There are certainly questions to be asked about the partnership approach there.
Last month’s unemployment figure for 16 to 24-year-olds sits at 79,000. That is down from last year, but it is still hugely concerning.
Talking of employment and unemployment, can we please not forget those 16 to 19-year-olds who are not in education, employment or training? There are 29,000 of them this year. That is bad enough, but there were 29,000 in 2007. Please do not forget about them.
The volume of school-college activity was 45,500 in 2010-11. In two years, it fell by 20,000.
You must draw to a close, please.
I will move to my final points.
There has been a reduction in the rate of female apprenticeships at the higher levels. I would like to know, given that it has been outlined how much money goes to local authorities, how much our FE colleges will be getting in order to utilise the tremendous expertise that they have, which would enable so many pupils and young people throughout Scotland to fulfil their potential.
I move amendment S4M-11901.1, to insert at end:
“; understands that employers are calling for more emphasis on employability to help prepare education leavers for the complex demands of the labour market; is particularly concerned with weaknesses in basic literacy standards and with the comparative evidence, noted in the recent Audit Scotland report, School education, which highlights some decline in overall numeracy standards between P7 and S2; recognises the urgent need for more, fully trained science teachers in primary schools to help address the weak uptake of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects, and urges the Scottish Government to use the excellent training facilities, expertise and experience of Scottish colleges to help deliver this strategy for young people”.
15:52
I welcome the Government’s refreshed youth employment strategy, which has the ambitious target of
“reducing 2014 levels of youth unemployment by 40 per cent by 2021”.
Today’s labour market statistics highlight the fact that youth unemployment has fallen by 26 per cent over the past 12 months. A further 40 per cent cut in youth unemployment over the lifetime of the strategy will produce lower levels of youth unemployment than the pre-recession average of 13 per cent between 2004 and 2007.
The Government’s “Developing the Young Workforce” report, which was published on Monday, highlights the need for greater partnership working if we are to achieve that reduction. A partnership between the Government and local authorities, with their responsibilities for schools and local economic development, is a key part of achieving a reduction in youth unemployment.
The Edinburgh guarantee, introduced by the City of Edinburgh Council and employers in the city, encourages all sectors to work together to ensure that every school leaver in Edinburgh will leave school with the choice of a job, training or further education opportunity being made available to them. That has resulted in an increase in the number of Edinburgh school leavers moving on to positive destinations. Over the past three years, the rate has climbed from 82 per cent to 91 per cent.
Since the guarantee was introduced, 1,370 jobs, apprenticeships and training opportunities have been generated by 250 employers across Edinburgh. Large employers in the city have signed up to the guarantee. The Standard Life intern programme has helped school leavers to experience an invaluable first taste of the workplace. They are provided with a real job for six months, as well as a development programme, and they are paid the living wage.
BT Scotland offers apprenticeships to young people, helps school students to develop employability skills through its work inspiration programme, and works with Intowork, so that people with disabilities get information and communication technology skills training and support to prepare them for employment.
Sainsbury’s works with schools, offering work experience, a mentoring scheme and interview skills to prepare students for leaving school. Those who gain employment with the company are helped to progress by developing skills and job-related qualifications, with apprenticeships and first-rate practical training at one of the company’s food colleges.
However, if we are to achieve our aim of substantially reducing youth unemployment, we cannot focus only on large employers. In its briefing for the debate, the Federation of Small Businesses highlights the point that although almost half of all jobs in the private sector are in small businesses, only 8 per cent of small firms employ an apprentice. When it surveyed employers, the FSB found that more than half of small employers had no engagement with the education system but that those who had engaged provided a range of support to school leavers from work experience and class talks to workplace visits.
For 42 per cent of employers, their top reason for not engaging was that they had not considered it, but there are good reasons why small employers should engage in the process by helping to mentor young people and—hopefully—employing a young person: they learn quickly; they are keen to gain valued skills to build a career; they are enthusiastic and loyal, because of the opportunity that they are being given; and there is support to reduce training and recruitment costs.
As Garry Clark, head of policy for Scottish Chambers of Commerce, stated at the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee on 8 October,
“Wood has set out a challenge for businesses to get involved in schools at an early stage and at a consistent level across the country, and we would certainly encourage our members to take advantage of that ... We want Wood to be central to what the Scottish Government is going to do on skills both this year and into the future, and it is important for business to take its full share of responsibility in that regard.”—[Official Report, Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, 8 October 2014; c 52.]
Other sectors, mainly hospitality and retail, have long recognised the benefits of employing young people, with a third of retail employees being under the age of 24. According to the British Retail Consortium, retailers on average invest £1,440 in training per employee, and the need to retain young staff in retail has resulted in more than 50 per cent of 16 and 17-year-olds and more than 85 per cent of 18 to 20-year-olds being paid at least the adult national minimum wage, even though the rates are lower for the under-21s.
You must draw to a close, please.
If we are to have a world-leading vocational education system and to tackle youth unemployment, we must meet the needs of industry and, as a result, require employers to help shape that system.
15:57
I welcome this opportunity to talk about developing Scotland’s young workforce. The commission has looked at ways of improving the transition from education to employment—and rightly so. The last time I talked about this issue, I said that the Scottish Government was guilty of undervaluing vocational education, and I still have serious concerns about how the commission’s recommendations can be implemented, given the savage cuts to college funding. Let us face facts: because of the Government, more than 140,000 places have been lost. Even though I have consistently reminded the Government about waiting lists for college places, it seems to be in no rush to resolve the issue. Instead, we are making even greater demands of colleges, which is quite frankly unreasonable.
However, credit must be given where it is due. The value of the modern apprenticeship programme and other such schemes that colleges are introducing is now being recognised, and I thank the colleges and their staff for the efforts that they are making, despite the Government’s cuts.
Targets for greater access to modern apprenticeships for disabled people, ethnic minorities and women need to be monitored clearly and closely by the Scottish Government and its agencies. Less than 2 per cent of Scotland’s apprentices have been drawn from ethnic minority groups, and only 0.3 per cent of all apprenticeships in Scotland have gone to disabled people. I find those figures horrific, and I am sure that the cabinet secretary will want to address the issue in her closing remarks.
On the commission’s recommendations on economic development, I welcome the new youth employment strategy, but the Scottish Government must take more ambitious and radical steps. Reducing youth unemployment by 40 per cent is a good start, but our future economy will be in a healthier position only when youth employment rates are in line with general employment rates.
As I have said before, college places are limited, and since 2007-08, there has been a 40 per cent decrease in the number of women in colleges and a 33 per cent decrease in the number of men in them. Most important, inequality still exists among our Scottish minorities.
I commend the small improvements in most of the commission’s recommendations, but more needs to be done. With the Government continuing to cut college funds, underfunding local government and generally putting a squeeze on education budgets, I struggle to see how the future changes can be made appropriately.
I will highlight a good example of improving youth employability in my constituency. Move On is a charity that got a lottery fund to run the FareShare volunteering employability project, which helps vulnerable young people in Glasgow to make the transition from the care system, homelessness or unstable backgrounds to stable adult life. It aims to run the project over five years and to help some 200 young people to learn skills, build confidence, train and gain work experience for CVs. It is a very good opportunity. I hope that the Government will continue to support such organisations over and above addressing the shortfall in college funding.
One of the most important things that I want to say is that I have consistently and repeatedly reminded the Government of its funding—particularly its college funding—responsibilities. Historically, the then First Minister, Alex Salmond, and the then Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, Michael Russell, both said to me that there were no cuts to colleges, but they both had to apologise because there were cuts. Despite those apologies, they never fulfilled the shortfall. I am still looking for that shortfall to be fulfilled.
We cannot expect our colleges and our staff to train young people to have real jobs and meaningful employment if we do not continue to support them.
16:02
I welcome the Government’s recognition and will that we can go further in our efforts to tackle youth unemployment.
I represent South Scotland, which is a vast region that is made up of rural communities. Although young people in the region face many of the same problems associated with unemployment that their urban peers face, my constituents face an additional set of barriers because of their geographical isolation and poor infrastructure.
The region has many economic strengths—for example, in tourism, hospitality, agriculture-related business and energy. The latter has been seized upon by Dumfries and Galloway College, which now offers excellent courses in that field—in particular, wind turbine technician courses and training in the maintenance and replacement of the cables that are used for the distribution and transmission of electricity. Considerable potential remains in both areas as the electricity distribution system is upgraded. I therefore welcome the new emphasis on STEM opportunities and training that the cabinet secretary announced this week as part of the £6.5 million extra funding.
Those energy engineering sectors provide young people with invaluable opportunities to grow, develop and build a worthwhile career, and the chance to do so without forcing them to leave the communities in which they have grown up. Dumfries and Galloway College has been particularly effective at focusing its courses on employment-related outcomes.
On that note, I welcome the Wood report’s endorsement of the Government’s direction of travel on college reform. As Sir Ian Wood said in his introduction to the report,
“Colleges have come on immensely since the Commission’s work started in February 2013. They are re-energised ... They have some good new leadership and are clearly recognising their opportunity to migrate up the technology skills ladder and to enhance the focus on employability of the students.”
How is college for the 140,000 students who cannot get a place?
As the member knows, the number of full-time equivalent students at our colleges is over 116,000.
That is not what I asked.
Mr Findlay, that is enough.
The figures that Mr Findlay quotes are just not true. In addition, for the past two years, we have spent £522 million on colleges, which is more than Mr Findlay’s Labour Governments ever spent on them, so I will not take anything from him on that.
Dumfries and Galloway College also has the advantage of sharing the Crichton campus with the University of West Scotland and the University of Glasgow, and those three institutions are breaking down barriers between further and higher education and pioneering some excellent examples of articulation between the institutions and, of course, parity of esteem.
Working in hospitality, one of the key employment sectors in the region, can involve irregular hours, which means that young people, who often depend on public transport, face difficulties in travelling to and from work and college. I therefore welcome the cabinet secretary’s response to Tavish Scott’s earlier question about additional support for rural businesses in employing young people.
In preparation for this debate, I contacted local employers for their feedback on the barriers to employing young people. I am particularly grateful to Dumfries and Galloway Chamber of Commerce and its chief executive, Gordon Mann, and to Tricia Hunter of the training agency Minerva People, who gave me some very useful pointers.
In Dumfries and Galloway, around 6,500 registered businesses operate with fewer than 10 employees, a higher proportion of small and medium-sized enterprises and microbusinesses than do so in the rest of Scotland. Some of those businesses tell me that the time required to mentor, train and develop a young person is substantial and that employers in smaller organisations do not have much spare staffing capacity. Dedicating an experienced member of staff to mentor a new recruit can have a significant knock-on effect financially, and of course small businesses do not have human resources teams to direct that kind of work. I am told that that is one of the main reasons why employers in SMEs and microbusinesses do not offer opportunities to young people.
My contacts also identified prejudices with regard to young people that are similar to those identified in the Wood report and to which the minister alluded. However, that gives us even more reason to challenge such attitudes. I particularly welcome the Scottish Government’s investors in young people award, which sends a very strong message about the positive benefits of employing young people. I also welcome the commission’s recommendation 20, which states:
“A small business Modern Apprenticeship recruitment incentive package should be developed to equip and support smaller and micro businesses to recruit and train more young people.”
That is extremely good news for rural areas such as Dumfries and Galloway.
You must close, please.
If even a small proportion of the 7,000 businesses there take on a young person, we would see a huge increase in youth employment, which I would whole-heartedly welcome.
16:07
I, too, welcome this debate on developing Scotland’s young workforce. I congratulate, albeit in absentia, Roseanna Cunningham on her promotion, as I do Annabelle Ewing, and I offer her an apology for earlier intemperate remarks.
As others have observed, the Wood commission’s report contained a comprehensive series of recommendations, but in publishing the report back in June, Sir Ian Wood also set out in very stark terms the challenges that we face, in that thousands of our young people are not in work or education and are wondering whether their community has any need for them. Fewer than 30 per cent of Scottish businesses have any contact with education to offer work experience opportunities or to recruit young people directly, and only 13 per cent of employers have modern apprentices.
Very deliberately, Sir Ian Wood set out a challenge to not just the public and voluntary sectors but the private sector to up their game. Of course, there are examples of companies that are doing precisely that. I am not sure whether Standard Life is back on the Government’s Christmas card list yet, but the cabinet secretary might wish to find out more about that company’s investment 2020 programme, which offers 12-month traineeships for successful applicants and can boast 100 per cent positive destinations for them, most of which are within Standard Life, whose business unit directors are now queuing up to take on trainees. The programme also helps to address an age profile in the company that was a source of real concern over the medium to longer term.
Standard Life’s programme is a good illustration of how transition from education into training and work can be made smoother. Gaining better vocational skills while in education and the opportunity to upskill even after leaving education are all part of the picture, which means that schools, colleges, employers, public sector agencies and Government all need to be involved.
I do not think that there is any lack of shared ambition for Scotland’s young people to have the opportunity of sustainable employment and the skills that they need to succeed in it now and in the future, but that ambition must be translated more effectively and less patchily into practical reality.
On the plus side, I welcome not only the fact that we have been achieving 25,000 modern apprenticeships but the ambition to move to 30,000. However, as I think ministers accept, it is not just a numbers game. The range of companies and sectors that are covered by modern apprenticeships needs to be expanded and the quality of those apprenticeships needs to be safeguarded and, in many cases, improved. Sir Ian Wood and the NUS have picked up on that point. Perhaps the involvement of former modern apprentices will help to make that happen.
I agree with the comments that Roseanna Cunningham made in her opening speech about equality of opportunity. We are seeing a problem addressed there, which is to be welcomed, but Mary Scanlon’s point about STEM also needs to be picked up.
On black and minority ethnic young people, I was struck by the following comment from the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights:
“The Strategy’s key message with regard to BME young people is that they embark on a narrower range of pathways than young people from the population as a whole, are more likely to experience unemployment and represent less than 2% of all Modern Apprenticeship entrants despite making up 6% of Scotland’s young population.”
There is more to be done there.
Colleges Scotland suggests that, even though colleges deliver more than 20 per cent of current modern apprenticeships, there is a lack of recognition of the role that colleges play—and the role that they might play in future—in delivery. As Neil Findlay and others observed, the Government is conspicuously failing to walk the walk on colleges.
We have heard about the cuts that the sector faces. NUS Scotland’s stop student poverty campaign is calling on the Scottish Government to put in place better measures to fund students throughout their education and to prevent them from falling into poverty. Its action comes a week after figures published by the Scottish funding council showed an £11.2 million shortfall in college student support funds.
Will the member take an intervention?
I think that the member made her point earlier, and I am running out of time.
The member is in his last minute.
The SNP’s raid on college budgets is having a direct impact on young people’s pockets. Students need the bursary funding to help them to manage the cost of living while studying. Without it, they either take on more debt or drop out, and the situation is starting to cut into efforts to broaden access. We are also seeing colleges struggling to meet additional support needs. In discussing college mergers, Colleges Scotland states:
“the consequent reductions in staffing levels have made the provision of good quality support much harder to achieve”.
Will you draw to a close, please?
There is a real need to focus on using the powers that we have, as well as those that come from the Smith commission, to build a stronger economy, a fairer society and, crucially, opportunity for all our young people.
16:12
I welcome the debate. I am sure that not one among us would demur from the intent and motivation behind the motion. Members might wish to amend it, but no one would disagree with its intent.
As has been mentioned, the young are critical in the context of supporting our national economic strategy and vision. Before I focus on modern apprenticeships and the associated training provision, I will comment on three particular areas. The first is mentioned but briefly in the Wood commission’s final report. An initial paragraph in the report mentions making
“recommendations towards Scotland producing better qualified, work ready and motivated young people ... both as employees and”—
here is the focal point—
“entrepreneurs of the future.”
Entrepreneurial education, which is not widely mentioned in the report, is as important for young people as any other education is if we are to unleash their manifest creativity.
Secondly, I agree with Mary Scanlon that, if we are to be successful, we have to eschew the notion—I believe that the report does this partially—that there is some hierarchy of contribution and that we have been somehow seduced into the Blairite belief that everyone should aim for a university degree. Imagine a world full of academics, lawyers and business experts but too few others to build, maintain and support our infrastructure.
Thirdly, we need to ensure that young trainees in whatever form embrace the fact that we face huge international competition. The success of our economic strategy depends on the alignment of the training and skills development of our young people, their creativity and their work ethic. Those things are important if we are to meet the aims in the national strategy and meet the international challenges.
The key component that underpins that is the foundation of modern apprenticeships, which are the keystone of our economic success. In the energy sector alone, modern apprenticeships are a keystone in the expansion of opportunity and reach for the sector. Because of demographics and growth opportunities—I will return to growth—30,000 engineers will be needed over the next seven to eight years, yet we exclude half our young from that, because we exclude young women from being attracted to the sector, primarily because of the culture and the perceptions of parents and teachers. Recommendation 30 of the report rightly calls for SDS to develop an action plan to address gender inequalities and disparities in modern apprenticeships, whatever the sector, and so we should.
On the success of modern apprenticeship programmes, although there is an emphasis on increased college participation, it is important to acknowledge the increasing role of quality training from training providers and to simplify and accelerate the processes between SDS and those providers to progress the intake and development of modern apprentices.
Recommendation 10 of the report addresses the need for greater employment engagement and the need to offer significantly more high-quality apprenticeships and so expand the number of modern apprenticeship starts. The cabinet secretary referred to the target of 30,000 modern apprenticeships a year by 2020. That could be met not necessarily with much greater funding but with a more ready and faster cycle of funding by employers and the Government skills agency.
We have to beget a critical progression to higher levels of training, which are as important in the construction and food and drink sectors as they are in engineering and other sectors. The bar for higher-level skills in the workplace has to be raised so that progress through the ranks from a trade apprenticeship to being a professional engineer, chef and so on is suitably determined. I support the report’s view that there should be an increased focus on modern apprenticeships at level 3 and above as we seek to create a market pool for a higher-skilled, higher-waged and revenue-generating economy.
There has always been a continuum at the heart of the apprenticeship system as skills are handed from one generation to another. If that is put together with clear development and a simplified training and funding structure that involves greater employer engagement, we can meet the skills challenge and make Scotland a truly global player.
16:17
I will focus on two educational matters that relate to the recommendations in the Wood report. One is a novel approach that is taking place in Galloway to provide a specialist vocational and academic education, and the second refers to the Wood commission’s recommendation that STEM subjects should be placed at the heart of the development of Scotland’s young workforce.
Because of time constraints, I will not go into the history of the development of the Dumfries learning town project, but it sits well with the Wood report’s recommendations. It will involve a rolling programme of refurbishment and rebuilding of four schools in Dumfries, the alignment of primary and secondary education to create integrated schooling across the town, and the creation of Dumfries learning hub, which will complement and extend the opportunities offered by local schools and Dumfries and Galloway College. The learning hub will offer specialist learning opportunities including vocational opportunities and skills development for work, for academic learning and for life. It will offer professional development for teachers and careers guidance for students. Importantly, it will also offer learning opportunities for adults who might have missed out when they were at school.
Teaching will be done by teachers who have specialist expertise, and it is envisaged that college and university lecturers and members of the business, sports and arts and culture communities and beyond will be able to contribute to a wider definition of education than is normally understood. The input of those people will give young people a better insight into the world of work and how they can prepare for that.
That chimes with many of the recommendations of the Wood report—on the delivery of recognised vocational qualifications alongside academic qualifications, appropriate resources for preparing young people for employment, the need to involve employers and employers’ role in economic development, and the need to provide good work experience and careers guidance.
Dumfries and Galloway Council has identified a preferred site that is accessible from all four schools but which is also—importantly—close to the parts of Dumfries where there is a higher incidence of educational disadvantage. That could address education inequalities for school pupils and other members of the surrounding community.
The second part of my speech relates to recommendation 12—that
“A focus on STEM should sit at the heart of the development of Scotland’s Young Workforce.”
That is generally about an earlier part of the education system—if we do not get the foundations correct for the embedding of STEM subjects, the recommendation will not happen. The right things have to happen in schools.
The Royal Society of Chemistry published eight recommendations to coincide with this year’s science and the Parliament event in November. In its briefing for the event, the RSC noted that Scotland’s overall rating for science education shows that we lag behind many of our international competitors—indeed, we are slightly behind England—and suggests that there is a need to provide inspiring science teaching from a very early age. With that in mind, the RSC recommends that every primary school should have—or have access to, in the case of small schools—a science subject leader who is a science specialist and who can provide leadership on science teaching and support for colleagues.
A science specialist could be someone who has at least one higher or an equivalent in a science subject—they would not need to have a degree in science. The current minimum entry qualifications for primary school teaching are English at Scottish credit and qualifications framework level 6, which is a higher, and maths at SCQF level 5, which is a standard grade—there is no requirement for any qualification in science at all. That is worrying, because somebody who has had a poor experience of learning science and gave it up at an early age will not feel all that confident about teaching it to primary pupils.
The RSC is concerned about the quality of practical work in schools, following a survey of Scottish schools that was carried out in November by the learned societies group on Scottish science education. The survey highlighted dissatisfaction at primary and secondary levels with the funding for scientific equipment and consumables, a lack of teacher confidence in primary schools and a lack of technician support.
Sciences are often considered to be academic disciplines, but they are also vocational, because the practical and experimental nature of science—the knowing by doing—engages younger pupils and inspires a desire for greater and deeper understanding. In my view, there are insufficient opportunities for school students to enjoy practical work. If we agree that STEM subjects should be at the heart of developing the young workforce, we need to stimulate interest in those subjects from an early age, with teachers and opportunities to capture and stimulate children’s innate curiosity about the world around them.
This is a cross-portfolio issue. We need to focus on how we can improve both engagement with and achievement in STEM subjects from the earliest part of school education right up to colleges and universities.
16:22
I am delighted to join other members in congratulating the Scottish Government on its ambition for our young people. The Government’s strategy is built on a strong base to develop a new approach to vocational education and training and to youth employment that will make us one of the best-performing countries in Europe.
I congratulate the cabinet secretary on endorsing and sharing the ambitions that are set out in the report by the commission for developing Scotland’s young workforce, and I welcome the Government’s implementation plan, which was developed in partnership with local government and many other partners. It is a plan for reducing youth unemployment, a plan for a fairer Scotland for our young people and a plan for all.
Sir Ian Wood welcomed the plan in June and said:
“The reforms which have already taken place in schools and colleges as well as the growth in the number of Modern Apprenticeships provide a strong platform for change.”
As Liam McArthur said, the Wood report has sent a strong message to all businesses in every sector that it is time for them to participate in the formation and education of our young people. The response has been very good so far, and I can testify that many businesses in the north-east have decided to get involved.
Why is it important for our entrepreneurs to have a voice in Scotland’s youth employment strategy? It is because they know the skills that are needed for today’s and tomorrow’s economies. However, it is not enough to recognise and facilitate businesses’ input; the employment strategy has to be regionalised and relevant to every sector.
To support the north-east and Scotland’s energy sector, energy skills Scotland has brought together employers and education in collaboration to meet the skills demands of the industry and to enhance the skills and prospects of energy workers. Energy skills Scotland is a Scottish Government and industry initiative, and those bodies are working together in partnership with the world of education and local authorities. I saw the initiative working in the classroom and I can report that an energy course is available to all children. I invite the cabinet secretary to come to the north-east and experience what that course has to offer.
I recommend to the Parliament the your future in energy programme, which is embedded in the curriculum for excellence. The programme is supported by the Scottish Government, ESS, the Society of Petroleum Engineers and many headteachers in the north-east. The study programme includes courses to help our young people to develop the skills that they require to consider a career in the energy sector.
Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce has recently undertaken valued and significant work on youth employment. I thank Rachel Elliott for the comprehensive briefing that we received prior to the debate. It is good that we have different organisations working in the north-east to address the problem. The fact that Sir Ian Wood comes from the north-east helps to generate that energy.
The Government’s plan builds on Sir Ian Wood’s recommendations and encourages and supports more employers to recruit more young people. For young people who live in the most deprived and rural areas, having equal access to employment opportunities is important. However, acquiring particular skills makes sense only if there is employment locally for young people to use those skills.
I am particularly encouraged by the Government’s strategy on advancing equalities in education and youth employment, which recognises that diversity in the workplace is key to addressing the wider inequalities in Scotland. That makes sense.
It is important to evaluate our success on the number of people gaining employment; indeed, that is a lot more important than evaluating the number of young people acquiring skills that they will never use. Page 14 of “Developing the Young Workforce: Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy”, under the section on “Measures”, says that key performance indicator 10 is to
“Increase the employment rate for young disabled people to the population average by 2021.”
That is a fantastic ambition.
The Government has a plan and a vision on how best to respond to economic and labour market needs. I share its ambition for our young people. Today, record numbers of young people are going into education, work or training. Under this Government, vocational education is given the same prominence and stature as academic education. Let us work together to support and empower our young people to make positive choices.
16:27
It is important to say that education should never be entirely about getting people ready for work. Education should expand horizons and help children to become well-rounded, resilient individuals who can make the most of life. Those attributes will also help young people in their working lives.
A desire for meaningful work is central to most people’s lives, which is why tackling unemployment and underemployment is vital. Unemployed young people can feel alienated and purposeless. As we know, the impact can be lifelong. Education should equip people to enter meaningful jobs that they can enjoy and take pride in. However, that requires an economy that is built not on low-wage, low-skilled jobs but on well-paid, meaningful employment.
During last month’s programme for government debate, I spoke about the challenge of fuel poverty and the need to retrofit thousands of our houses with insulation, double glazing and other low-carbon improvements. I said that the cabinet secretary
“has an important role to play in creating a workforce with skills in sustainable construction and retrofitting.”—[Official Report, 26 November 2014, c 44.]
I will expand on that point.
John Swinney was clear to me in the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee’s budget scrutiny that he thought that retrofitting of energy efficiency measures should be a national infrastructure priority not only because it will tackle fuel poverty and cut emissions but because, importantly, it will create new jobs in the construction industry and new opportunities for young people through the modern apprenticeship scheme. WWF estimates that there will be 3,500 jobs in the short term and 9,000 jobs by 2017.
I looked at some of the construction industry skill surveys to get a feeling for how confident employers are that they have the people with the right skills to deliver an increase in energy efficiency. In 2011, ConstructionSkills surveyed 1,200 companies and sole traders; 30 per cent of them thought that environmental regulations and eco design would prompt the need for new skills or knowledge. In its construction sector skills assessment in 2012, the UK Commission for Employment and Skills said that, when it came to skills,
“It is the retrofitting of existing building stock which poses the greatest challenge to the industry”,
but that there is an opportunity there, too.
In its 2013 skills survey of 1,300 construction professionals, the Chartered Institute of Building found that 44 per cent of respondents did not believe that the construction workforce would have the skills required for the green deal. A quarter of people marked the need for energy efficiency training as very urgent. The CIOB has also talked of the need to
“develop a new ‘green focused’ workforce that moves away from ‘generic’ construction skills”.
It is clear that there is already a demand for new energy efficiency and retrofitting skills. We need a programme of high-quality, well-paid apprenticeships. On top of the existing market, the plans for regulation of energy efficiency in private sector homes will boost demand.
There are also jobs in repairing our existing homes. That topic was discussed at the most recent meeting of the cross-party group on construction. An incredible 57 per cent of Scottish homes have disrepair to critical elements. Having a building that is wind and watertight is a basic prerequisite for having a comfortable home that is affordable to heat. There is a repairs backlog that could keep many people in important work for a long time, and a reduction in VAT on repairs could result in a huge jobs boost. It is important that the Parliament continues to call on Westminster to make such a change.
I know that Skills Development Scotland has been administering a low-carbon skills fund for SMEs of £100,000 in 2014-15. That is very welcome, but it is important that low-carbon skills are included in as many apprenticeships and as much training as possible. I recently asked written questions on how energy efficiency skills are included in the training for modern apprentices in the construction industry. There are no specific retrofitting courses or apprenticeships. I hope that we can change that, and I would welcome any update from SDS or the cabinet secretary.
It is highly important that diversity is built into the modern apprenticeship scheme. It is fair to say that the STEM apprentices whom I have met have been largely—although not exclusively—young men. I know that colleagues have raised the issue of gender segregation and that the cabinet secretary and the Government are aware of the challenges in attracting young women into those valuable careers.
In addition, young people with disabilities, those who are leaving care and those from ethnic minority backgrounds were identified by the Wood report as needing extra support when they enter and participate in vocational training. That is welcome, because there is likely to be extra financial pressure on disabled young people, and there might be opportunities to look at more flexible age requirements and more flexible working for people with some types of disability and for those who are leaving care.
Investing in young people and in tackling fuel poverty makes sense. Vocational education can help to ensure that all our young people get the training that is best suited to them, but it is also vital that the jobs and industries that we help to create are skilled, well paid and make a positive contribution to society.
I call Stewart Maxwell, after which we will move to the closing speeches.
16:33
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
“Failing to invest in our youth is a false economy. Investments in young people will pay great dividends in a better future for all.”
Those are the words of United Nations secretary general Ban Ki-moon when he spoke in New York at the launch of the 2011 international year of youth. The international year of youth was established by the UN in 1985 with the aim of increasing the quality and quantity of opportunities that are available to young people for full, effective and constructive participation in society.
We know that it is often young people who are disadvantaged the most during periods of economic recession. Therefore, the investment by the Scottish Government over the past few years in initiatives such as opportunities for all and the youth employment Scotland fund has been important in improving the employability of our young people during difficult economic times, and has resulted in record numbers of young Scots going into education, work and training. The latest figures from Skills Development Scotland show that, across Scotland, more than 92 per cent of school leavers entered a positive destination in 2013-14. Nonetheless, it is a tragedy every time a young Scot goes through school only to become an unemployment statistic, and it is clear that there is still a lot of work to be done to address the challenges of youth unemployment in Scotland.
More than 77,000 modern apprenticeship places have been created over the past three years, and I welcome the Scottish Government’s commitment to increase the number of places that are available each year, from 25,000 to 30,000 by 2020. A survey of modern apprentices that Skills Development Scotland carried out in 2014 showed that modern apprenticeships are highly regarded, with four out of five participants completing a modern apprenticeship in order to gain a qualification and improve their future job prospects. In fact, 92 per cent of those who complete their modern apprenticeship go on to be in employment six months later. It is clear to me that the continued growth of modern apprenticeship places will be crucial to improving vocational education and employment opportunities for many young Scots.
I highlight the work that Young Enterprise Scotland is carrying out in East Renfrewshire at its academy training centre, which is based near Rouken Glen park in Giffnock. The YES academy, as it is known, which Young Enterprise Scotland runs with support from East Renfrewshire Council and other partners, recently celebrated its first anniversary. Its main aim is to create opportunities for young people to obtain the skills and confidence that they need to gain access to secure employment.
The academy works with a range of local schools, colleges and employers to give youngsters the chance to gain qualifications and new skills in areas such as construction, horticulture and hair and beauty. That not only helps local young people to become more employable but benefits local businesses, which gain from having access to a more skilled and confident workforce. The community in East Renfrewshire also benefits from the work that the academy does on local projects.
Back in March, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to host an event in Parliament that highlighted the excellent work that the Prince’s Trust Scotland undertakes. The trust helps around 9,000 young people in Scotland each year, many of whom are from disadvantaged backgrounds. Three in four of the young people whom it supports go into education and training, get jobs or start their own businesses.
During the event, we heard from a number of inspiring young adults who spoke about how they were able to overcome adversity and make better lives for themselves with support from the Prince’s Trust. It was encouraging to hear from so many young people who had struggled with educational attainment but who still managed to better themselves and become successful, although it was troubling to reflect on what might have happened to those young Scots had they not had the support of the trust’s dedicated staff and volunteers.
Much of the work of the Parliament’s Education and Culture Committee has focused on improving the life outcomes of looked-after children. However, we intend to consider how to address the attainment gap in education for other disadvantaged groups of children and young people. Therefore, I ask the minister to say in her closing speech what the Scottish Government’s plans are to address that gap and, in particular, what action it is taking to raise attainment levels among Scotland’s most disadvantaged young people.
The launch of the Scottish Government’s new youth employment strategy is to be welcomed and I support the Government’s plans to deliver an improved work-relevant educational experience for Scotland’s young people.
I would also be grateful if the minister would comment on what the Scottish Government can do to ensure that our young people are better equipped not only to enter the world of work, but to become entrepreneurs and job creators themselves. Scotland’s past is filled with examples of successful entrepreneurs and innovators, from Andrew Carnegie to John Logie Baird. Encouraging a similar spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship among young people today will be just as beneficial to Scotland’s future.
Excellent. Many thanks. We are bang on time. I remind all members who have taken part in the debate that they should be in the chamber for the closing speeches, to which we now come.
16:38
I congratulate the cabinet secretary and the minister on their new positions.
It has been, largely, a thoughtful debate. I reiterate the Conservatives’ support for the Government motion and the Labour amendment. We cannot really disagree with the tone of either for the reasons that Chic Brodie mentioned in his speech.
All sides of the political divide accept that the domestic and international economic problems of recent years have had a profound effect on the whole economy. However, perhaps the greatest impact has been on many of our young people and, although the unemployment rate for young people in Scotland has not reached the exceptionally high levels that we see in other parts of Europe, there are still significant problems, notwithstanding the very encouraging statistics that the cabinet secretary and Gordon MacDonald mentioned. There is definitely an improvement, but we have to accept that the level of unemployment among young people aged 16 to 25 is still twice as high as that for the rest of the working population. That is exactly the focus that Ian Wood had when he set out on his report.
If we are to ensure that the Scottish economy is stronger in the future, the onus is on all of us to help to boost the jobs market. The cabinet secretary was right to talk about the quality of the jobs rather than just their number—that is a crucial point.
I reiterate another crucial point, which my colleague Mary Scanlon made when she spoke about the 29,000 youngsters who are not in any form of training, employment or education. Ignoring that could cost the economy up to £2 billion, according to the Government’s own statistics—if my memory serves me correctly. That should send a strong message to all of us.
If there is one key issue in the Scottish Government’s motion, it is that of the changing nature of economic circumstances. That is a very important point to make. However, the motion is a little too narrow when it comes to tackling some of the complexities of the labour market. I will spend a little time on that point, because we can be in absolutely no doubt whatsoever about the very real issues that confront youngsters with poor literacy and numeracy. That is not just the case among those who are perhaps the furthest removed from the labour market; it is also the case—although this is not widely recognised—among those who have qualifications.
Alison Johnstone made a good point about the wider perspective of what education has to try to do, but it cannot do that unless there are significant improvements in literacy and numeracy across the board and in the ability of youngsters to use those skills when they get to work. The Confederation of British Industry Scotland and the chambers of commerce point to the worrying fact that they still have to carry out quite a lot of remedial work with new employees.
We need to be clear that young people have to be extremely versatile these days—perhaps much more so than the generations before them. To do that, they have to be much more adaptable in their working practices. They have to learn not just a bank of knowledge but how and why things happen, using an interdisciplinary approach. I am a great supporter of the basic philosophy of curriculum for excellence, but I do not think that it is working in the way that we have to ensure that it does for that interdisciplinary approach to really work.
That brings me to colleges. I agree whole-heartedly with the comments that have been made about the need to redress some of the college cuts. I do not think that Joan McAlpine was right to say that it is just about full-time equivalents, although the position in that regard has undoubtedly remained the same, which I think is progress. However, that is not where the problem lies. The problem is with help for those who, previously, would never have aspired to a college education. The point was made by Neil Findlay and Hanzala Malik—
Will the member give way?
I will just finish this point.
This is about helping part-time students, students with disabilities and ethnic minority students, who perhaps find it very difficult to engage in college education as they have specialist needs. I think that we should be focusing on that aspect of the college cuts.
Will the member acknowledge the praise in the introduction to Sir Ian Wood’s report for the reorganisation of colleges, and particularly for the focus on employment outcomes as a result of that reorganisation?
I acknowledge that Ian Wood concentrates very much on colleges’ ability to deliver according to local circumstances. However, that approach needs to take account of the fact that a lot of the college cuts have severely affected those who find engaging in college education difficult and who want to work in their local community. That is the problem that the Government has to address.
There is a very strong message from the universities about their approach to colleges and schools.
I will pick up on a point that Elaine Murray made in her very interesting and thoughtful speech about the approach to STEM subjects. I think that we have to add modern languages to that, because the evidence that has been presented to the European and External Relations Committee shows that we still need to do a great deal to ensure that the one-plus-two language strategy is working properly. The Scottish baccalaureate was supposed to address that issue, but it does not seem to have caught the imagination of schools or pupils—or of colleges or universities.
This has been a very healthy debate that has, I think, been relatively free of the party-political rancour that we sometimes have. There have been a lot of thoughtful suggestions and I look forward to the minister’s response.
16:44
Like others, I welcome the new youth employment strategy and the partnership approach that it embodies, although I think that our amendment emphasises that that approach should include trade unions and universities, as well as the other partners that members have talked about extensively.
We are also pleased about the £6.5 million for local authorities that was announced this week, but there are funding issues in other parts of the education system—and in the training system, which I hope to come on to in a moment.
We welcome the overriding target—40 per cent by 2021 is a good start—but it could be more ambitious. The Scottish Government’s early years strategy refers to “stretch targets”; perhaps a stretch target is needed in this area.
I very much agree with what Mary Scanlon said about valuing the skills of every person equally. However, I emphasise the danger of going back to the old approach of having two streams for pupils in schools. The Wood commission’s final report notes on page 36 that
“Our Interim Report emphasises that the Commission does not favour separate academic and vocational streams. Young people should be able to participate in both in line with their career aspirations.”
It is important that we hold on to that view.
Central to the agenda is the need for more opportunities for young people to undertake learning that connects more directly with employment. There are many proposals in the report and in the Government’s response that address that need.
We welcome the new standards for work experience. We also welcome earlier careers guidance, although Neil Findlay noted that he expressed concerns in that area some time ago. It is a fact that Skills Development Scotland has been cutting back on face-to-face guidance in recent years, so some of the report’s recommendations swim against the tide of what has been happening.
One could also say that about the emphasis on more school-college partnerships. Those partnerships are central to the objective of increasing the uptake of work-related learning and qualifications in the senior phase of school, yet in a briefing that members received this week, Colleges Scotland said that, because of funding policy changes four years ago, there has been a reduction in school-college partnership activity. The figure dropped from 45,500 in 2010-11 to 26,330 two years later. Colleges Scotland recommends a national funding framework for school-college partnership provision. That framework will be important, given that such partnerships are so central to the strategy.
I will not repeat the comments from members on further education and college funding, but we cannot just dismiss, as Joan McAlpine did, some of the figures that have been quoted. Liz Smith was right to say that colleges have helped many people who would not have aspired to a college education previously, and we must be concerned about 140,000 places being cut and a real-terms budget reduction of £67 million over the current five-year period.
Apprenticeships are central, too. The Wood report recommends new quality assurance processes and new incentives to encourage small and medium-sized enterprises to take on more apprentices. We welcome in principle the Government’s target of 30,000 apprenticeships by 2020, but there is an issue with the quality of those apprenticeships. The report’s recommendation for more apprenticeships at level 3 and above echoes what Labour members—particularly Neil Findlay and Kezia Dugdale—have been saying for some time.
One surprising feature of the Wood report and the Government’s response is that there is very little on contribution rates. Members received an interesting briefing today from the Scottish Training Federation, which pointed out that training organisations delivered more than 75 per cent of the completions for the modern apprenticeship programme. Those organisations seem to have been rather forgotten in the debate.
The STF also pointed out that its funding has stayed static for more than 10 years. It said that it will be difficult for the Scottish Government to deliver 5,000 additional modern apprenticeships on the back of significant reductions in the contribution rates. It would be interesting to hear from the minister on that subject in her winding-up speech.
Many members have rightly mentioned recommendation 12, which states:
“A focus on STEM should sit at the heart of the development of Scotland’s Young Workforce.”
I think that all members agree with that.
There was not a great deal on STEM in the Government’s response, but I was glad to hear the cabinet secretary say that some of the money that has been announced this week will go towards enhancing STEM opportunities, as that is a big issue.
Science in primary schools was rightly emphasised in the Conservative amendment and by Elaine Murray, who referred to the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s work in that area. I certainly agree with the need for a science subject leader in primary schools.
Gender segregation in the STEM subjects has also been mentioned. The issue of occupational segregation was rightly highlighted by the cabinet secretary, and some of the report’s most interesting recommendations apply to that area. For example, we are told by the Government that the Scottish funding council is
“publishing a plan to reduce gender imbalance on courses in joint action with Skills Development Scotland and other partners”.
We will all watch developments on that front with great interest, because it is—as Alison Johnstone emphasised—a matter of great concern.
Last but not least is the active partnership with employers that is recommended. I am glad that the national invest in young people group has been established.
There are interesting recommendations in the Wood report that it would be good to hear more about. For example, recommendation 22 states:
“Procurement and supply chain policies in both the public and private sectors should be applied to encourage more employers to support the development of Scotland’s young workforce.”
We have not heard much about that area, but it could be fruitful.
Recommendation 25 talks about “Financial recruitment incentives”. It is never easy to talk about money. We have talked about money for colleges and training providers, so I will understand if the Government reminds us that money is not exactly in plentiful supply.
I point out the great success of the Edinburgh guarantee. Part of that has been an Edinburgh jobs fund, which offers a wage incentive to businesses with fewer than 400 employees to hire a 16 to 24-year-old in a new or additional position. The fund offers a wage subsidy of 50 per cent of the national minimum wage for a maximum of six months. Some local authorities are already taking effective action. I hope that some of the money that has been announced this week will result in similar action throughout Scotland.
16:51
I am pleased that we have been able to set out our implementation plans and refreshed strategy that will support our young people better for employment. As members have heard, we have a positive vision for Scotland’s young people and for our schools, colleges and employers, as well as for teachers and all the others who work with Scotland’s young people every day. It is a seven-year national programme on which we will report our progress annually so that we can all keep track of how the Scottish Government is doing against its ambitions. Our commitment to young people is clear.
We have heard about the important issue of narrowing the attainment gap in schools. Although that is, in the first place, a matter for the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, I note that the First Minister has taken a keen interest in the subject and regards it as a priority for the Scottish Government. Initiatives are already under way and others are planned, including the appointment of an attainment adviser for each local authority and the read, write, count campaign on literacy and numeracy, which is aimed at primary 1 to 3.
We have heard about the ambitious target to reduce youth unemployment by 40 per cent by 2021. Mr Findlay accused the Government of not being ambitious enough in its targets, but in fact—as he will know from having read the Wood commission recommendations closely—we have taken our lead from Sir Ian and his commission on that. Our target will put us in the top five nations in Europe. I suggest that, by any measure, we do not lack ambition for our young people—far to the contrary.
I turn to our ambitious target to increase the number of modern apprenticeships to 30,000 a year by 2020. The review shows that currently the majority of modern apprenticeships—some 65 per cent—are at level 3 or above. A Skills Development Scotland survey showed that 92 per cent of modern apprenticeship completers have been in work for six months or more, which Stewart Maxwell referred to, and that 79 per cent are in full-time work. We are working with Skills Development Scotland to develop long-term measures, as was identified in the Audit Scotland report “Modern apprenticeships”. I hope that Mr Findlay will acknowledge that work.
On Mr Chisholm’s point about contribution rates, that is of course an operational matter for Skills Development Scotland, although I understand from the Scottish Training Federation’s briefing to members for the debate that it is engaging “robustly”, as it describes it, with SDS on the matter. We look forward to hearing more on those discussions.
As the cabinet secretary said in her opening remarks, we have the ability to build on the important initiatives that have been taken in the sector, the strong regional college system, the undeniable success of Scotland’s modern apprenticeships programme and, of course, curriculum for excellence. Those provide us with a long-term plan.
The minister is absolutely right, but does she accept that when it comes to providing for local needs there is real pressure to ensure that college places that allow for part-time and more flexible work are in the economy and not on the cutback list?
I suggest to Liz Smith that that is not, in fact, the case. Curriculum for excellence gives us the flexibility that schools need and have been asking for, as far as I am aware. It is surely all about equipping young people with the skills that they need for learning for life and for work.
The Wood commission’s report gives us a blueprint from which to progress. The commission was made up of talented and passionate people, and their continued involvement, through a range of groups and networks, will be a real asset to everybody who is involved in implementation. That is why the cabinet secretary and I are pleased to announce that Sir Ian has agreed to join the national advisory group in order to ensure that we continue on the right track in the coming years.
We will not allow the programme to lose any momentum, and we will use the breadth of expertise on our programme board and our national advisory group, as well as that on the national invest in young people group, to drive progress and shape implementation in the coming years. However, as has been said, the Government cannot do that on its own. That is why we will look to the talents of people across Scotland—and across Parliament—to support this endeavour. In that regard, I am appreciative of the broadly supportive comments that we have heard today from the Conservative front bench, from Liam McArthur, from Malcolm Chisholm and from others. It is important that we all work together to secure the objectives.
The important issue of the advancement of equalities was raised by a number of members. It is right to say that we are absolutely determined to ensure that our plans encompass all young people, and we will work with all partners and stakeholders to ensure that the focus now moves to what a person can do, rather than what they cannot do. In that respect, it might interest Stewart Maxwell to know that there is a pilot project that is looking to get more care leavers—[Interruption.]
One moment, minister. There is far too much noise from members who are just arriving in the chamber. You have not been part of the debate; you should allow members who have been to hear the minister’s summing up.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
That pilot project is designed to get more care leavers into modern apprenticeships, and is run in conjunction with Who Cares? Scotland, Action for Children Scotland, Barnardo’s and Quarriers.
There is, of course, a particular role for public bodies to play. Sir Ian’s report recognised the potential for public bodies to be exemplars in supporting the education and training system in general, and in recruiting young people. In that regard, the cabinet secretary has written to the chief executives of all public bodies to encourage them to develop an invest in youth plan that will set out what they will do to support the development of our young workforce. We will monitor the performance of those public bodies through their corporate plans and by assessing the number that achieve the important accreditation of the investors in young people accolade.
Local government is, of course, a key stakeholder, and we have worked closely with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities at every stage of the programme. I look forward to continuing that partnership approach. COSLA is represented on our programme board and jointly chairs our national advisory group. I thank COSLA for all the hard work that it has done to secure the formulation for implementation of the Wood commission report.
Schools are also important. We have had an interesting discussion about the role of schools and, in particular, about the fact that the implementation strategy must involve children at a younger age, including at primary school. I support the comments that members made in that regard.
It is axiomatic that schools should work closely with colleges, but it is essential to the success of the youth employment strategy.
Will the minister give way?
I am afraid that I am running out of time, and I have already taken an intervention.
It is important that schools and colleges work closely together to deliver vocational education for our young people.
On the important issue of parity of esteem, I simply say that of course there is parity of esteem and that the vocational opportunities are designed to give our young people an additional opportunity at school, and are not to be at the expense of any other academic opportunities.
We work closely with colleges. We have heard the usual claims, from the Labour front bench in particular, about college numbers. Of course, we have in fact maintained student places at 116,000 full-time equivalent places. I say gently to Mr Findlay that it would, on the odd occasion, be useful for him to compare apples with apples. [Interruption.]
Order.
It does our young people no service whatever to make misleading comparisons.
Will the minister give way?
The minister is in her last 15 seconds.
This has actually been a very consensual debate. [Interruption.] I could not possibly repeat what the cabinet secretary just said.
I look forward to working closely with all members from across the chamber who I know, in their hearts, support the opportunity for our young people to have a chance in life. That is what they want and that is what we parliamentarians have a duty to deliver.
Previous
Historical Child AbuseNext
Business Motions