The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19756, in the name of Daniel Johnson, on Scotland’s skills system. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons. I advise members that we have no time in hand whatsoever, so I will have to require members to stick to their allocated speaking time.
15:02
[Interruption.] Apologies, Presiding Officer. There were some odd flashing lights on my console—hence my swift manoeuvre.
I have a speech prepared, but I first want to reflect on the evidence that we took this morning at the Economy and Fair Work Committee, which is carrying out a short inquiry on artificial intelligence. We were told this morning that we have a three-to-five-year period after which we face the very real prospect of billion-dollar businesses with a single employee. We heard that the level of change in the way in which we organise and run businesses will also apply to public administration, and that we need to get the workforce ready now. We have three to five years, yet the Government is embarking on the sort of bureaucratic reorganisation that might take three to five years before we can even get going. That is the problem.
Scotland is bursting with ambition and potential, but our broken skills system is letting people down and holding the country back. Too many people with talent and aptitude do not have access to the training and opportunities that they need. Youth unemployment is rising, skill shortages are endemic and, across the economy, levels of in-work training are plummeting. That results in businesses whose growth is held back and an economy that is stifled. Most importantly and tragically, it results in individuals being denied opportunities and, indeed, better wages. That is because the Government has failed to prioritise skills for several sessions of Parliament.
I am listening to the member with interest, and he will know that I believe that the scale of opportunity in Scotland is such that we need to have a skills pipeline. Does he accept that, with unemployment at fairly low levels—lower than the United Kingdom average—one of the challenges is the size of the workforce, and that getting specific talents and skills also requires targeted visas?
That intervention from the Deputy First Minister ignores the fact that the number of people who are economically inactive is higher in Scotland than in the UK. Let us have that full and frank conversation—the Government, however, simply refuses to be full and frank.
At the previous election, the Scottish National Party promised 30,000 modern apprenticeship starts per year by the end of this parliamentary session, but it has failed. Only 25,500 places were funded this year, which is a shortfall of 4,500 and is 8,500 short of the 34,000 places that industry says that it needs to meet demand.
We have growing sectors in our economy that are crying out for more apprentices. Scottish Engineering has said:
“Scotland needs an additional 58% of new engineers across 31 key roles by the end of 2027, over three quarters of which are delivered by apprenticeship programmes.”
According to the Construction Industry Training Board, the construction workforce in the south-east of Scotland alone is 20,000 people short of industry demand. Those two sectors are critical to Scotland’s economy. The construction sector is the literal source when it comes to building the growth that we need, but it is being hamstrung by a system that fails to prioritise according to its needs.
It is not about money; it is about choices. We know that the money that Scottish businesses pay through the apprenticeship levy far exceeds what the Scottish Government chooses to spend on skills. Scottish firms pay a payroll tax on the premise that the funds will go into workforce development, only for the Scottish National Party Government to plunder that money to spend it on mitigating its financial incompetence. Last year, the shortfall between what the Scottish Government was granted through the block grant and what it actually spent was £62 million. That is an estimate, because the Scottish Government will not publish the figure, and I note that the Conservatives have a different figure. We simply need that clarity. If we want a full and frank discussion, let us have transparency on the funding that is being delivered through the levy.
Confidence in the Government is low, and apprenticeship numbers are not keeping up with demand. The Government has scrapped the flexible workforce development fund and dismantled industry-facing bodies such as the Scottish Apprenticeship Advisory Board and Skills Development Scotland. We need a new and genuinely lifelong skills system that starts at school, opens up routes to work for young people in education and helps to retrain and upskill experienced workers so that they can take advantage of new and developing opportunities and industries.
Evidence suggests that between the ages of six and eight, children begin to form occupational aspirations. From the age of nine to 13, they begin to dismiss potential roles on the bases of gender, esteem or competence. As things stand, more than half of all young Scots who do not go to university do not have a clear line of sight to good jobs and training. By the time they arrive at the point at which they make choices about their future, they are disempowered by an education system that is decoupled from the world of work.
It does not have to be like that. In Greater Manchester, Mayor Andy Burnham is developing the Greater Manchester baccalaureate, which involves partnering with industry to deliver the combination of subjects and work experience that will set young people on a pathway to good work and training. In my constituency, Liberton high school has, despite the system, partnered with employers such as Balfour Beatty to pioneer a small-scale construction pathway that gives young people early hands-on experience in construction. With a clear vision that everyone matters, Liberton high school is doing its bit to get more young people into well-paying construction jobs, but it is the exception, and the programme is in doubt because of a lack of funding.
We need to get every part of the education system thinking about skills and the world of work. That is why, by working with industry to introduce clear pathways from school into jobs, training and education, a Scottish Labour Government would give every pupil the opportunity to fulfil their potential. Rapid changes in our economy—in technology, the climate and, imperatively, demographics—mean that we must stop viewing skills as a thing that people do once at the start of their careers.
Our modern apprenticeships programme is genuinely first class, but it is slow to adapt to economic changes and is inaccessible to learners who are already in the workforce. That is why we need to give learners who look to upskill or retrain the ability to do so while in work through a modular system that is all underwritten by student finance and that supports them in the same way that it supports those who do a university degree.
It has been eight years since the Scottish Government’s enterprise and skills review outlined serious deficiencies in the skills system and three years since James Withers published his review, but instead of fixing the problems that users are experiencing, the Government’s only foray into the skills base has been the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill, the only function of which is to shift responsibilities from one agency to another. That simply will not meet the challenges that we face over the next three to five years, as outlined at the beginning of my speech.
I move,
That the Parliament believes that Scotland’s skills system is letting down young people and holding back economic growth, and further believes that there needs to be a new partnership between education and industry, with better careers advice in schools central to it, and new Scottish industrial pathways to link school subjects to future careers, guaranteed industrial placements for secondary school pupils including in industry and a clearing system for apprenticeships, so that good candidates do not fall out of the system.
15:09
Excuse me—I lost my voice slightly at Hampden last night, as I am sure much of the country did, across different parts of our society. What we witnessed last night was a sense of resistant optimism, which I have talked about in the chamber before. That is relevant to the motion and the amendments that we are debating today.
I appreciate the constructive suggestions in the Labour Party’s motion and the constructive tone of some of what is in the Conservative amendment. That is what we need. The principal problem with the motion, however, is that in its opening line it states, erroneously, that the
“skills system is letting down young people and holding back economic growth”.
Yes, there is room for improvement, and we need to work together on that and on the challenges that have been set out in relation to the technological revolution that is happening across the world. However, such negativity is erroneous and is not helpful—let us be constructive and work together.
Does the minister not at least agree that the fact that 4,500 fewer people than the Government’s own targets are getting an apprenticeship means that young people are being let down?
I have stated before, as have colleagues, that we have an ambition to grow the number of modern apprenticeships, graduate apprenticeships and foundation apprenticeships. At the moment, there are a record number of people in modern apprenticeships. Yes, there is more demand in the economy than we are meeting, and, yes, there are colleges that want to fill more places. We want to work together with them. We recognise the challenge. However, to state that the system is not working in any way for our young people, or for business and industry, is erroneous. A good amount of work is happening across the country between industry and educators in schools, in order to prepare our young people, who are flourishing.
For example, in the past few weeks, we have had Scottish careers week. That was a great opportunity for people from a variety of industry sectors to go into schools and other settings to help young people and those who are retraining to realise what career opportunities are available to them—whether in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, hospitality, care, the creative industries or many other areas. In recent days, I have had the great pleasure of attending many initiatives, including a conference that was jointly organised by the Federation of Small Businesses, the Institute of Directors Scotland and Young Scot. All those entities are working together with SDS, Developing the Young Workforce, the third sector, teachers, universities, colleges, parents, guardians and carers, and through initiatives such as the career services collaborative, to help people to find the next steps on their journey.
I agree entirely with what the minister has just said. Nonetheless, I was at a conference at Edinburgh Napier University on Monday at which people were saying that the number of older people who need to be upskilled is substantial, and growing. What measures is the Government putting in place with those agencies to ensure that there is that upskilling as well as the initial training?
That is a significant point that gets to the heart of the skills agenda that we are undertaking through a programme and a set of primary legislative changes.
For Opposition members to state that there is only one thing happening, which is a piece of primary legislation, is incorrect. The Deputy First Minister and I are progressing a whole programme of work that does not require primary legislation to provide more skills opportunities. I have already committed that the Government’s ambition is to increase the number of graduate apprenticeships. There is “Scotland’s Offshore Wind Skills Priorities and Action Plan”, the energy transition skills hub, the oil and gas transition training fund, and so much more that we want to deliver and build on, as well as—as I said earlier—a record number of 25,000 modern apprenticeships.
Will the minister take an intervention?
The minister is concluding.
This year, we also have a record number of more than 110,000 vocational and technical qualification awards.
There is more to do. That is why the primary legislation is important. If we bring all the provision in to one institution, for higher and further education and apprenticeships, we can increase the offer and the efficiency and we can create flexibility, new opportunities and the agility to deal with the technological challenge, more opportunities for retraining—which will only become more important—and parity of esteem for people who are starting or changing their career.
There is so much more that I could say, but I will leave it there.
I move amendment S6M-19756.2, to leave out from first “believes” to end and insert:
“agrees that there needs to be greater partnership between education and industry, with better careers advice in schools central to it, and clear and coherent Scottish pathways to link school and college courses to future careers, improved placements for secondary school pupils, and better information on career choices, job prospects and earnings, alongside an ongoing commitment to apprenticeships; acknowledges the significant progress made over the years to deliver a record number of apprentices in training at the end of 2024-25; notes that, despite the impact of Brexit and a failing UK economic model, resulting in workforce challenges and barriers to trade, Scotland is the best performing part of the UK for inward investment outside of London, has a lower unemployment rate than the UK, and has near record positive destinations, and agrees that independence offers the best opportunity for Scotland’s economy to grow and create wealth and prosperity for all.”
I remind members who wish to participate in the debate but have not already pressed their request-to-speak buttons to please do so now.
15:15
When I saw that it was to be Labour business today, I thought that Daniel Johnson might have chosen to debate next week’s tax rises by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or perhaps the communications strategy of 10 Downing Street towards his colleagues, but instead we are talking about skills. I very much welcome that, because there is much in the Labour motion that we agree with.
Daniel Johnson is right in his basic proposition, because the simple fact is that Scotland’s skills and apprenticeship system is not working. It is not working for business, it is not working for the economy and it is not working for young people, who are being robbed of opportunities. I heard Mr Macpherson’s defence, but I say gently to him that he should look at the evidence that the Economy and Fair Work Committee took from stakeholders back in the spring. Every single stakeholder that we heard from said that the current system is not working, and that is why it needs to change.
I challenge Mr Fraser and colleagues on that. The current system is working very well for many people, including many employers and many learners. Is it necessary for us to continue to improve the system? Yes, but let us work collaboratively on that as a shared challenge.
I say to Mr Macpherson that he should go back and review the evidence to which I referred, because it gives a somewhat different picture.
Part of my concern is that the Government’s focus is on structural reform and shifting apprenticeship funding into the Scottish Funding Council. We can see today the funding crisis that our colleges and universities are facing, and there is real concern that funding that currently goes into apprenticeships will be diverted into filling the black hole in funding for universities and colleges.
As Daniel Johnson said, we know that far more apprenticeship places are sought than are funded. According to Skills Development Scotland, there is currently demand for 34,000 modern apprenticeship places annually, but, in the most recent year, funding was provided for just 25,000 places. That gap means that we are not meeting the needs of our economy.
According to the Open University’s business barometer survey, 56 per cent of Scottish businesses are currently experiencing a skills shortage. The shortage is greatest in acute sectors such as construction and engineering, where there is substantial demand for a future workforce but not enough people are being trained.
Investment in apprenticeships is money well spent. The evidence shows that, for every £1 of public money that is spent on training and apprenticeships, £10 is invested by employers, and that, for every £1 that is invested, between £4 and £5 is returned in tax.
Just a few weeks ago, I led a debate in the chamber on funding for the college sector. According to Audit Scotland, there has been a 20 per cent real-terms reduction in funding for colleges over the past five years, which is causing significant issues in that sector, including redundancies, the cutting of courses and reductions in campuses. Unless that trend can be reversed, we will continue to see an issue whereby our skills offer does not meet the needs of the population.
Daniel Johnson rightly mentioned the apprenticeship levy. I am consistently told by employers in Scotland that they are being disadvantaged in comparison with employers south of the border.
Will the member give way?
I think that I am in my last minute.
You are.
I apologise to the Deputy First Minister.
Whereas employers in England can directly access those funds, that is not the case in Scotland. The latest data shows that the SNP is siphoning off £171 million from the apprenticeship levy to spend elsewhere in its budget. Data from His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs shows that at least £875 million was raised by the apprenticeship levy between 2020 and 2024, but, in the same period, only £704 million was spent on apprenticeships in Scotland. If we are serious about supporting apprenticeships, that apprenticeship levy money needs to come back into the sector and not disappear into the SNP’s black hole.
This week, we set out our plans for a demand-led system for skills and apprenticeships. Those plans are covered in my amendment, which I am pleased to move.
I move amendment S6M-19756.1, to leave out from “, with better” to end and insert:
“; believes that this must be underpinned by a demand-led skills system that equips young people with the qualifications that employers need to grow Scotland’s economy; notes that the Scottish National Party administration has failed to pass on over £170 million of Apprenticeship Levy funding and has provided around 10,000 fewer apprenticeship places than learning providers requested, contributing to a widening skills gap in key sectors including hospitality, construction, engineering and care; further notes that colleges have faced a 20% real-terms funding cut, leading to job losses, falling student numbers and financial instability, and calls for urgent reform to invest in colleges, fix Scotland’s broken apprenticeship system, address skills shortages and allow local employers to shape training that matches their workforce needs.”
15:19
The Economy and Fair Work Committee has heard over and over again about the advantages of workplace learning, not only for traditional vocational careers but also for secondary school pupils and post-secondary students. I am still reasonably shocked by the relatively limited joint working between industry in Scotland and Scotland’s universities and colleges, compared with course delivery in North America. When I graduated in engineering way back in 2000, I did so with more than two years of work experience in industry through my university’s co-op programme. That involved paid work—at well above the minimum wage—in chunks of four, eight or 12 months.
In the United States and Canada, it is normal process for engineering companies to take on engineering students to undertake discrete projects, and to attract potential talent for long-term recruitment. That helps students to cover the costs of learning and it helps them to gain invaluable skills. When I arrived in the UK, I was offered two jobs in my first two weeks here on the basis that I had practical experience, even as a fresh graduate, which gave me a significant advantage over my UK peers.
There is a great deal of scope for improved connections between post-secondary education and industry in Scotland to support success in key industries and to make our graduates employable. There is also scope to find alternative funding streams to support the delivery of post-secondary education, perhaps by getting industry to fund either key placements of students or equipment that students might need to use. The Scottish Government should show leadership and set out intentions on that with urgency.
Apprenticeships in Scotland are a mixed story. Employers are very keen to hire apprentices, and apprenticeships are in high demand. A higher percentage of apprentices go on to work in the subject area that they have been trained in, compared with university students. However, I was unable to find statistics on that for college graduates, which somewhat begs the question about the difference in focus and funding between those two routes. It could be said that substantial public funds are being wasted on students who study at university but do not go on to work in their field of study. At the very least, that should be a matter of self-reflection for universities that are claiming financial difficulties.
Additional funding for apprenticeships to allow more people of all ages to take them up would be a sound investment in Scotland’s future. About 90 per cent of the people who study in an apprenticeship go on to work in the field or sector in which they have studied, so that learning is valuable.
Several matters concern me about how apprenticeships are being delivered in Scotland, despite the positive headlines. First, the quality of apprenticeships varies widely, with no standards for minimum training hours or quality of instructors. I met an apprentice who worked for one of our local authorities. That young woman had no standard hours for training, and she was expected to do online training. If she did not get on with her supervisor or did not think that the training was adequate, there was no one that she could complain to, and her supervisor could fail her if she issued complaints. That is not a good standard of training.
Apprentices in traditional trades have union representation to look out for their interests and the quality of their instruction, but other apprentices lack that representation and have no one to turn to if they are mistreated or are provided with sub-par training. Apprentices need an independent regulatory body to ensure fair treatment and quality control. That is especially critical for apprentices in sectors that do not have a college affiliation.
Apprenticeships in Scotland are substantially focused on men, to the disadvantage of women.
You need to conclude.
Not only are most apprentices men, but women apprentices are consigned to lower-paying sectors and lower-paying jobs. It is worth prioritising and correcting that.
15:23
The good news is that there is huge demand for apprenticeships. It is fantastic that so many people are willing to learn and that we have excellent people who are prepared to impart their knowledge in our colleges and workplaces. There are also employers who are desperate to take new people—particularly young people—into their workforces.
The bad news is that, as we know, the system is disjointed. It has been criticised repeatedly by Audit Scotland and in the Withers report. My disappointment is that all the knowledge that James Withers shared is now being narrowed down into a structural discussion about whether SDS should have some of its powers removed and transferred to the Scottish Funding Council. We are not debating any of the other issues that we should be debating. I deeply regret that, because employers are divided and there is concern in the sector that we are not addressing those fundamental problems.
When I visited the excellent Dundee and Angus College yesterday, I heard stories from young people there about their lives being transformed. People who had not spoken for years had been lifted out of that state and are now on the verge of employment. Some really good people are being trained, and the opportunity for work is therefore increased. That shows the diversity in the sector.
I then went downstairs to see the plumbers, who told me that, because of the minimum wage, employer national insurance contributions and the state of wider business confidence, employer demand for apprenticeships in that sector has fallen. There is therefore potential for youth unemployment—particularly in Dundee, in this case—as a result of failed employer demand. However, the college is unable to take on those young people to do higher national certificates or other qualifications, because its funding has been cut. The system is unable to flex based on the confidence in the sector.
I think that the minister, with his bill, is trying to get a whole-system approach, but the reality is that the whole system is the economy. It is not just about apprenticeships and universities and colleges—it is about everything. For example, yesterday’s announcement of the delay to the heat in buildings bill will further knock confidence in the companies that are looking to employ plumbers. That has an impact on confidence so that we cannot transform the heating systems in buildings. What we need in our skills set-up is for the funds to follow the learner, but they also need to follow employers’ needs now and in the future. That is a complex set of conditions, but instead of having discussions about that, we are back to a discussion about structures.
The thing that concerns me most is that we are not getting to grips with our 16 to 64-year-old working-age population. The economic inactivity in that group is one of the highest in the United Kingdom. It bounces between one in four and one in five. We need those people to work in order to pay the taxes to fund our public services. However, the economy—that whole system—is broken. That is what I believe. It is not just about the narrow apprenticeship system; the fact is that we are not focusing on the whole economy, the skills within it and economic inactivity. My plea is for us to have a wider debate about all those things so that we can get the economy moving, rather than having narrow debates about structures.
We move to the open debate.
15:28
When I looked at the motion and the amendments for the debate, I could see in each a lot of positives on which we could agree. It would be great if political parties in this place were able to come together more. Daniel Johnson talked about a full and frank discussion, but we need to add honesty—about where we are, what needs to be done and how we move forward together in the interests of the people of Scotland.
A month or so ago, I was in Forth Valley College for a morning meeting, so I went for breakfast in its excellent cafe. I met a young man from Kirkcaldy, who told me that he was working for a firm in Fife, doing an apprenticeship. He was so excited to tell me about the college, his apprenticeship and how he was getting on. It is therefore important that we recognise that the colleges do not sit in isolation from the wider economy. There was devastating news yesterday about Mossmorran, where apprentices will need support on how to move forward. We need a joined-up approach to employment and the economy.
As Willie Rennie found when he went to Dundee and Angus College, I found Forth Valley College buzzing with people. In our debates, we should be careful not to talk down the success that is happening across Scotland’s colleges. The Colleges Scotland “Keyfacts 2025” report outlined that.
Many people have a good experience in our colleges, but we need to be honest. Audit Scotland pointed out that, during the current parliamentary session, colleges have had a 20 per cent real-terms cut to their funding. Colleges such as Fife College and Forth Valley College have made it clear that they cannot continue with the cuts that they are having to make to their budgets.
As part of that honest discussion, let us consider what needs to happen on funding. The motion and the amendments all talk about links with schools; we need to make that link much stronger. We need to recognise that some pupils who come through the school system and come out the other end without the basic skills that they need will not be successful in a college education.
Daniel Johnson talked about the work that a school in Liberton is doing with employers. A lot of excellent work is happening with employers. I could rattle off umpteen schools in Fife that are doing really good stuff, and employers have bought into that. However, there needs to be more of a strategic approach to that.
Schools are signing up for a project in Fife called the hub, which I have mentioned to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills on a number of occasions. Pupils who are struggling in school—and, indeed, many pupils who do not want to go to school—go along to training workshops in Methil. Schools across Fife are using that. Many of the young people who I have talked to who have taken part have gone on to get an apprenticeship. Had they not had that opportunity, they would have come out of the school system with no opportunities. We also need to look at models of that kind. That hub is doing brilliant work, but it is struggling to get financial support. I have had meetings with Fife Council education officers to discuss how we can support that organisation. Schools are actively supporting it, and the outcomes are being demonstrated.
We need to be positive about what is going on, but recognise that there is a serious funding issue and that we need a more joined-up approach. I wish that members from all parties in the chamber would start to work together and put the people of Scotland first.
15:32
I thank Daniel Johnson for the debate. It is enormously important that we discuss this issue in the chamber, to ensure that not only our young people, but those who are already in the world of work—Liz Smith made that point—have the requisite skill set that they need in order to take up the opportunities that exist in the labour market.
Those who are coming down the track are of fundamental importance. The nature of the labour market is changing. Daniel Johnson made the point about artificial intelligence changing the nature of our labour market. Automation will change the nature of our labour market, and changed patterns of consumption will do so, too. We also need to focus on the just transition, so debating the issue is important.
I absolutely agree that we should not be immune to any suggestion about how we can continue to improve our education and skills system. The minister made the point that we should not close down any discussion about how we can improve it.
Mr Johnson’s motion says that we should improve careers advice in schools. I remind him that we have the careers collaborative, which is established and is already working towards that end. His idea about having a clearing system for apprenticeships is interesting and worthy of exploration. It would not be exactly analogous to the clearing system for universities, because it is a paid employment opportunity. However, I take on board the point that Lorna Slater made about the ability for pupils to attain graduate-level qualifications while simultaneously being in employment. We are starting to see that through graduate apprenticeships being embedded as part of our skills system. We should be willing to discuss that idea further.
However, I cannot agree with the terms of Daniel Johnson’s motion, and I cannot agree with the notion that our skills system is letting down our young people. I agree with Alex Rowley that we should not talk down our system, but, when we use that type of terminology, we are at danger of doing so. The overwhelming majority of young people who leave school go on to a positive destination and have a life-changing experience, such as I had going on to further study at university, or going to college, into training—there are 38,000 apprentices in training right now—or into employment, and we should recognise that.
I will pick up on what Alex Rowley said about focusing on colleges. We have excellence in our colleges. For example, when culinary students from my local college, New College Lanarkshire, took over the restaurant in Parliament, Clare Adamson and I enjoyed their hospitality and the meal that they prepared. At its Motherwell campus, New College Lanarkshire also has a smart hub that helps hundreds of businesses to use robotics to improve their processes.
Mr Rennie mentioned Dundee and Angus College. I have had the pleasure of visiting that excellent college, which is doing excellent activity. Edinburgh College, in Mr Johnson’s home city, with its digital care hubs, is preparing people for opportunities in health and social care, with a particular focus on technology-enabled care. I could go on with many examples from across the country that I have seen first hand.
We should reflect on the fact that, although our system can, of course, always be refined and improved, there is already excellence. If we are going to have the type of conversation that we should have about improving our education and skills system, we must bear in mind that we already have strong underpinnings.
15:36
MSPs have described how they feel that Scotland’s skills system is failing too many young people and is holding back our economic growth. There is a need for a new partnership between education and industry, with better careers advice at its heart and clear, supported pathways from the classroom to the workplace. For too long, the system has lacked coherence, vision and investment.
I will begin by talking about colleges, which have a track record of linking education with industry, including through schemes such as the flexible workforce development fund. However, instead of colleges being empowered, they have been placed under limitations. I can remember when college reorganisation was pushed through without the funding that was needed to make it work. That reorganisation should have strengthened partnerships but instead narrowed access by placing restrictions on the broad and inclusive approach where colleges partnered closely with business and communities. As Alex Rowley said, more recent funding changes have also had a negative impact. The consequences have been predictable. Opportunities have been lost, partnerships have been weakened and too many young people fall through the cracks, as James Withers showed in his review.
Our colleges are striving to deliver for their learners and local employers, despite the financial environment that they face. Following yesterday’s announcement about the Mossmorran plant, Fife College was swift to engage with Scottish Government officials on its preparations to support affected workers. Many of those working at the plant are Fife College students and graduates.
The college partners with more than 180 employers, including Babcock and RES Group, and delivers one of Scotland’s largest modern apprenticeship programmes. Its new Carnegie campus is ideally placed to deepen those links, especially with the high schools that it has on its doorstep. Elsewhere in Fife, at Levenmouth academy, we have seen the value of co-location. Young people there are able to get hands-on experience of working on real community projects and they gain an early understanding of the practical skills that local industries need. That is the kind of partnership that we need to see more of, but it cannot be left to chance.
We need to address the failure to deliver the requested number of apprenticeships, which is leaving young people without the routes to employment and opportunities that they need, and leaving employers without the people that they need to plug the skills gaps that persist across our economy.
In our schools, careers advice must start earlier and be more ambitious. We know that children, even in primary school, begin to rule out jobs on the basis not of their ability but of their confidence; that might be because of stereotyping or because they simply do not see people like them in certain roles.
Parents need support, too. I meet too many parents who worry that their children lack a plan or who default to the assumption that university is the only route. Good advice can open doors to opportunities that they did not know existed.
We must be honest, as others have said, that, too often, careers advice is still gendered. Far too many girls are steered away from science, engineering and construction. Women who succeed in those fields are often framed as succeeding despite the barriers, when our job is to remove those barriers. That must be reflected in our classrooms, in our careers services and in the workplaces that young people are stepping into.
When we create links between education and industry, it must be with the goal of helping all young people to find the right route for them. Part of that should involve working to close the disability employment gap, but we have to build such an approach into our skills and pathway systems, rather than bolting it on at the end. Scotland cannot afford to waste talent, and we cannot keep relying on a fragmented skills system that leaves too many young people behind and leaves many employers without the workers that they need.
We need to pursue a vision for a flexible, lifelong skills system that recognises and supports the role of our schools and colleges, makes apprenticeships more responsive and builds genuine partnerships with employers so that Scotland’s workforce matches Scotland’s economic needs. That is how we raise productivity, close the skills gap and give every young person the chance they need to reach their full potential.
15:40
As always, I am delighted to speak in support of our education and skills sector. It is great to see Labour at long last accepting what I and my colleagues on the Conservative benches have been demanding in skills development for years. It shows that members of other parties, even if they are a little late, can join us and be persuaded to get on the right path.
Who would have thought that we would be debating the idea that we should be matching skills development with industry need? What has the Scottish Government been doing for the past 18 years? The answer is that there has been an on-going systematic dismantling of the FE sector. At a time when we desperately need a huge increase in apprenticeship numbers, the Scottish Government has squeezed funding for our colleges, forcing cuts year after year.
I have often said in the chamber that education is the cornerstone of every portfolio. I came into this place saying that education was the solution to health and welfare issues. A good education leads to decent, well-paid jobs, which has an impact on predicted health outcomes, leading to a reduction in the pressure on our national health service. Decent, well-paid jobs also lead to a higher tax take, which allows for greater investment in our public services.
The alternative is increased pressure on the welfare budget, which is exactly what we are seeing from the SNP Government. The Government’s one-dimensional thinking is exactly what is holding back Scotland’s economic potential and starving our pupils and those wishing to upskill of those important opportunities.
Among the many fantastic FE colleges across Scotland, Ayrshire College is a shining example of what can be achieved. It is working closely with local industry to develop apprenticeship programmes that are required in engineering, including in aerospace, trades and social care. Prestwick Aircraft Maintenance Ltd, which is based at Prestwick airport and services Ryanair aircraft, is desperate to expand its operation and create more than 700 jobs. It is working with Ayrshire College to develop an apprenticeship programme in engineering and aircraft maintenance. PAML already contributes millions of pounds to the Scottish tax take, yet it told me last week that it is having to recruit from as far afield as Ethiopia and Turkey because of the lack of local apprenticeships.
XLCC plans to operate 200 apprenticeships by 2030, once its plant at Hunterston is operational. Again, the company is working with Ayrshire College to develop that skill set. The companies in the engineering cluster around Prestwick are also looking to expand. The limiting factor in that economic expansion is access to constant apprenticeship throughput. Meanwhile, Ayrshire College has reported that some 834 applications from qualified applicants for apprenticeship places have had to be turned away because of lack of Government funding. Those include 400 places in engineering, 120 in apprenticeships and 71 in social care. So much for the issues in social care staffing being only down to immigration; we cannot even give people in local communities the opportunity to work in social care.
The same is true for foundation apprenticeships. A lack of foresight means that there is a lack of opportunity for pupils. If someone is academically minded and good at exams, there is a pathway for them through the education system to university and beyond, but what about a pathway for those who would excel in travelling the foundation apprenticeship route into modern apprenticeships and on to successful careers? That is just as viable a route into great careers, but it is hugely undervalued by the Government.
We need careers advice in schools that enthuses pupils to consider the pathways into great local careers. That should include recruiting local industry to showcase opportunity, but we need a Government that will match that industry need with an investment in our education system that speaks directly to it. It is only when the Scottish Government wakes up to the economic opportunity that increasing apprenticeship places would offer that our economy will reach its potential. After 18 years of SNP mismanagement, however, it is obvious that it will not come from that department.
15:44
It is a great pleasure to speak about the vital work that is under way across our education and skills system, which is helping people of all ages to reach their potential and is strengthening the foundations of Scotland’s economy. At the heart of that effort is a simple belief that every young person deserves a chance to succeed, and that Scotland thrives when its people thrive.
The SNP Government is investing more than £2 billion to give people access to education, training and opportunities that shape lives. That investment is guided by a clear purpose: building a fair, prosperous and successful economy, supported by an education and skills system that is flexible, responsive and ready to meet the needs of communities, employers and future industries.
I have to make the same apology about my voice as the Minister for Higher and Further Education did, because I was at Hampden last night.
Nowhere is the importance of Scotland’s colleges clearer than in my constituency of Coatbridge and Chryston. New College Lanarkshire, which is a campus in Coatbridge where I am a regular visitor, was recently named the further education institute of the year at The Herald education awards. It secured four awards, including the widening access award for its pioneering undergraduate school, which was created with the University of the West of Scotland. As the first degree-level school on a Scottish college campus, it is opening up fairer and more accessible routes into higher education. Almost half of its first cohort came from some of the most socially and economically challenged parts of Lanarkshire. With innovative programmes such as Scotland’s first dental nursing degree and the learning well online platform for adult learners, the college is transforming opportunities locally. Successful students such as Chloe Sandilands, who was in the press after she overcame homelessness to become a champion for inclusion and wellbeing, have shown the life-changing impact of a supportive college environment. That is exactly what investment, innovation and fairness can achieve for places such as Coatbridge and Chryston.
Colleges across Scotland play a vital role every day. They are powerhouses of learning and aspiration, ensuring that learners gain the skills that our economy needs now and in the future. Tens of thousands of learners progress through Scotland’s colleges each year, and the Scottish Government continues to support them, with more than £750 million invested into our 24 colleges and the apprenticeships that they deliver. However, we all recognise that colleges and universities are facing financial pressures, which have been intensified by the austerity that has been imposed by the UK Labour Government. Its cuts restrict Scotland’s public finances and limit our ability to invest even more in education.
Rising energy bills, inflation and increased employer national insurance contributions have created around £50 million in extra costs for Scotland’s educational institutions. It is not just colleges and universities that have been affected; businesses in Coatbridge and Chryston and across the country are feeling the impact of rising energy costs and the national insurance increase. Those costs reduce their ability to hire apprentices and invest in local jobs. I hear that often from businesses when I am out and about visiting them, as I am sure other members do.
Despite the pressures, Scotland remains committed to expanding skills and apprenticeships. This year, the SNP Government is providing £185 million to deliver 25,000 new modern apprenticeships, 5,000 foundation apprenticeships and 1,200 graduate apprenticeships, while supporting more than 38,000 apprentices who are already in training. Supporting young people goes beyond qualifications. It means giving them confidence, guidance and personalised support. That is why this year’s programme for government commits to improving school-age and adult career services, including better information on job prospects and earnings. We are also expanding recognition of prior learning, helping people to change careers and build on the skills that they already have.
As we look ahead, we must confront the reality that many of Scotland’s skills shortages have been driven by Brexit and UK immigration policy. Scotland was taken out of the European Union against its will, losing £2.3 billion in revenue, and faces higher borrowing costs as a result. Labour’s migration plans will make it harder to attract international workers and students. Those policies run counter to Scotland’s needs and values and, by contrast, the SNP recognises the immense contribution that migrants make. That is why we have proposed a Scottish graduate visa, which would ensure that Scotland can retain the talent of those who study here.
Scotland has huge potential. By continuing to invest in education, apprenticeships and skills, we are ensuring that every young person has a chance to fulfil their future. Despite the pressures from Westminster, we remain determined to support learners, strengthen our economy and build a fairer and more prosperous Scotland for all.
I am sympathetic to Fulton MacGregor for the loss of his voice, but I would be grateful if members who were fortunate enough to have been at Hampden would not rub it in for those of us who were not.
We move to closing speeches.
15:49
In my opening remarks, I voiced my concerns about the fact that gender inequality appears to be built into our apprenticeship system. Not only are most apprentices men, but women apprentices are consigned to lower-paying sectors and lower-paying jobs. That cannot stand. Quota systems must be introduced to ensure that everyone is benefiting equally. Public money cannot be used to trap women in low pay. Increasing the pay of women is one of the most significant interventions that can be made to reduce poverty and increase income tax receipts.
To be honest, I have similar concerns about much of the provision of college courses, which is something that the Scottish Government theoretically has a say in. We appear to be using public money to teach boys to weld and girls to cut hair. That sort of intentional creation of gender inequality using public money must be challenged. Further, at a time of financial challenge, public money should be spent in line with Government priorities, such as net zero.
The final matter that I would like to bring to the Scottish Government’s attention is that of apprenticeships in key traditional skills. From the creation of tartans and tweeds to the restoration of traditional masonry in buildings, there is a host of traditional skills in Scotland where the current cohort of workers is ageing. Those skills are important to the fabric of our history and culture. They have significance for tourism and for refurbishment of structures of historic significance. However, organisations cannot take on apprentices to pass on those skills, because the apprenticeship frameworks do not exist for them. Skills Development Scotland does not consider that there is sufficient interest in such skills to develop the relevant frameworks. If we do not update the guidance in that regard, we risk losing the ability to produce tweeds and tartans and to restore and refurbish our historic buildings. I urge the Scottish Government to reconsider the guidance, as responsibility for apprenticeships is moved to the Scottish Funding Council, to allow for—indeed, to encourage—the creation of apprenticeship frameworks in relation to skills that are culturally, historically or strategically significant, even if there will be only a handful of apprentices in any given year.
15:51
On Monday, Russell Findlay and I visited Edinburgh College to tour its construction facility—the Minister for Higher and Further Education will know it well, as it is in his constituency. We met lots of young people, not just from Edinburgh but from East Lothian. In speaking to them, we could see the opportunity that they have finally been able to realise. I hope that, if they get the skills that they are there to learn, they will get the security that is provided by good jobs and will be able to get on with their lives. It was interesting to have conversations with young people who had a focus on exactly why they were there and who wanted to be there.
The debate has addressed a number of aspects that relate to that. In his opening speech, Daniel Johnson touched on the jobs of the future and on planning for them. As Murdo Fraser said, the skills system is currently not meeting our economy’s needs. We need to be mindful of where we should be working collectively to make a change to achieve that. I do not think that the Government’s Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill will do that, which is why the Scottish Conservatives will work to amend it. We need transparency on the apprenticeship levy and annual reporting, so that we can see where that money is going.
Our college sector is crying out for help. The Scottish Government and all parties need to hear that. Eleven institutions are not only reporting financial difficulty but clearly at a point of failure, and we need to collectively act on that. As ministers have said, the university sector is too big to fail, but I think that the college sector is too important to our economy to fail. Alex Rowley made important points about why that is.
Recent reports from the Scottish Funding Council and Audit Scotland have highlighted the dire financial situation that our college sector is now operating in. It is the key to the ability to get on in life for many young people—especially those who are furthest removed from our education sector and the workplace. Claire Baker mentioned disabled people in that regard. Ministers have clearly not been able to ensure that the opportunities that colleges offer are available for everyone in our society.
The minister mentioned the energy transition skills hub in Aberdeen’s North East Scotland College. It is a great example of what we should be doing to plan for and invest in the jobs of the future. The problem is that the college will have no extra credits for that facility and will therefore have to look to reduce the number of courses that are taken by its student body—including courses in hairdressing, which was mentioned earlier—in order to provide that opportunity. Ministers need to understand and review the delivery of those credits in order to meet the needs of our economy and to ensure that those institutions have opportunities to deliver.
That is why Scottish Conservatives have made our proposals. I am a huge fan of school-college partnerships. We must look at where we can get our young people into training opportunities earlier—whether that is at age 14 or 15. When they have a spark, we must consider how to give them opportunities for their future.
We should have an apprenticeship plan and demand-led reform to meet the needs of businesses, to address the skills gap across many important sectors—almost every single sector in Edinburgh—and to support the jobs growth that we need in the east of Scotland.
It is time for a vision for our college and skills sectors, and I hope that the next Parliament and the next Government will realise the potential of our college and apprenticeship sectors. Those sectors want to deliver, and we need to give them the opportunities now to do that. I do not think that the Government’s Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill will provide those opportunities, so I hope that all parties will send out a message from the Parliament that we need something bigger and better from the Government. We need to put our apprenticeships at the heart of our education system.
15:56
I will start by agreeing with Willie Rennie that it is great news that there is huge demand for workforce because of the opportunities in our economy. Often, Opposition debates go down a doom and gloom route about the state of our economy; it is great to see that completely reversed in this debate. One of the symptoms of growth is the need to recruit and ensure that we have the right skills.
I am grateful to Labour for bringing the debate to the chamber today. I am slightly confused, though—for Conservative Party Opposition debates, its back benchers at least turn up, but I think that fewer than half the Labour members are here this afternoon. I certainly think that this is an important issue to discuss.
I will go through some of the points that have been made. A number of people talked about employers and public sector colleges and schools that are doing an excellent job. I have certainly seen that myself. Just last week, when we launched the new workforce north scheme, which is a workforce plan for the Highlands and Islands to respond to the £100 billion of investment that is in the pipeline, we met a number of apprentices of different ages and from different backgrounds—some of them were career changers in their late 40s and some were straight out of school. That illustrates just how diverse apprenticeships are right now. This year’s record of 110,380 vocational and technical qualification awards demonstrates the growing recognition of those routes and their positive impact.
I am keen to return to miserableness. Could the cabinet secretary accept or address the point that I raised about the reduction in plumbing apprenticeships in Dundee as a result of low confidence in that sector? Does she think that we need to have a system that responds to the varying needs of different parts of the economy? There seems to be no flex for that.
I agree on the importance of plumbing apprenticeships. From speaking to a number of different employers, I know that even when there is a significant investment to be made—as I heard this morning—the challenge of securing tradesmen and women illustrates just how big the demand is and the need to ensure that there is that pipeline.
The issue of flexibility across the country is particularly close to my heart. The work that we have done in the Highlands and Islands with the workforce north scheme, for example, and the work that we are doing in the south of Scotland, which is tailored to specific opportunities, illustrates that there is already scope for flexibility in the system, and we should make the most of that.
[Made a request to intervene.]
I have only five minutes and I am three minutes in.
Alex Rowley talked about the good work that is being done by employers. He mentioned the workshops in Methil—the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills was telling me how much she enjoyed her visit there. Claire Baker talked about the novel approach of the co-location of Levenmouth academy and Fife College. The Scottish Government funded more than half of that initiative, which illustrates our desire to support such co-location.
Jamie Hepburn and Fulton MacGregor talked about the strength of our education and skills system. We also heard about the work that is being done by one of my favourite colleges, Ayrshire College, which is right at the heart of our growth agenda, particularly regarding aerospace. I have had a lot of engagement with the college in recent months.
Daniel Johnson talked about the scale of in-work training. There are some useful statistics from the employer skills survey that show that, overall, 60 per cent of employees have received training in work. That figure illustrates the commitment from employers to support in-work training.
We also heard about opportunities for structural change. I heard what members said about not focusing so much on structural change that we lose the opportunity to make changes now. However, we have a time-critical opportunity to make structural changes to the education, skills, careers and employability system to ensure better alignment—that point comes through in Daniel Johnson’s motion. We are also taking action right now to respond to need, including the provision of £2 million for engineering skills in the Glasgow city region area.
Finally, we heard from the Conservatives about the apprenticeship levy. That is all part of the Barnett formula grant, and how that comes through is not a decision that we can necessarily influence. However, I assure the Conservatives that we make a considerable investment in skills. I think that the Conservative figure is based on a freedom of information request to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. We would certainly be open to working with the UK Government in the way that it worked with us from 2017 through to 2019-20, when it identified how much funding came through the apprenticeship levy. That was helpful for us, so we would certainly not argue against identifying the funding that comes through the apprenticeship levy.
16:02
Because this is the first opportunity that I have had to do so, and because we are discussing skills, I congratulate the incredible skill that Scotland’s men’s football team showed last night in getting through to the world cup. I recognise the importance of that skill. [Applause.]
I am pleased to close the debate for Scottish Labour. We believe that education and skills are keys to unlocking potential. In their contributions, members across the chamber have highlighted how important the issue is.
Scottish Labour's approach to unlocking that potential is underpinned by three clear principles. First, skills reform should be industry led, with education providers and employers working in lockstep to harness expertise and get young people ready for the jobs of today and tomorrow.
Secondly, the system must be dynamic, adaptable and tailored to the needs and ambitions of pupils. Learners from the ages of 12 to 52 should have pathways available to them that give technical and vocational learning parity with academic pathways. That includes teaching Scottish industry standards in high schools, giving a clear pathway to jobs and offering a digital skills passport so that everyone can recognise skills consistently.
Thirdly, our skills system must be at the heart of expanding opportunities for young people. That means making it easier and faster to approve new apprenticeship frameworks, widening access to those frameworks and creating a clearing system—Bob Doris was right to draw comparisons with universities in that sense. I note that any such clearing system would have to be bespoke.
Apprenticeships are key to plugging our skills gaps, and we must broaden our thinking on how we can provide opportunities for learners to earn and learn. I agree with Claire Baker, Willie Rennie and others that we must do that with a focus on the whole economy. More school leavers than ever tell me that they want to work and train on the job and to secure their independence. We need to facilitate that. It is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to look ahead to the challenges that our society will face in the future and do its best to prepare for them now, but it has failed to do so.
Daniel Johnson’s opening remarks about AI and construction highlight just two critical sectors in which skills gaps are yawning. Sadly, Bob Doris and Fulton MacGregor pointing fingers elsewhere rather than at what their own Government is doing will not help us to address such gaps.
Skills are provided not just by colleges or through apprenticeships but by universities. The significance of artificial intelligence has not really been referenced in the debate. We must have a broader view of what the skills base is, especially as we move towards having greater demands for AI-related skills. I hope that the member agrees with that point.
Ms Duncan-Glancy, I can give you time back for that intervention.
I agree whole-heartedly with Mr Rennie’s point. Scotland’s universities have an incredible contribution to make towards our skills base—indeed, they already do so. I am sure that, with support, they could make an even greater contribution.
The impact of the Government’s approach has not just been seen in skills gaps in industry. It is letting down young people and workers across Scotland, who are missing opportunities that would quite literally change their lives. I must say gently to the minister that that is not erroneous—it is, indeed, a fact.
Young people and workers cannot wait for two, three or four years for another report, for another working group that goes nowhere or for outcomes that are aspired to but never achieved. As the Government stalls, young people are growing up without opportunities to gain skills that would serve them throughout their working lives and beyond, and people who are already in careers are failing to access the opportunities to upskill that they deserve to have.
The fact that nearly a quarter of a million young people are not in work—and that, significantly, many of them are from our areas of highest deprivation—shows that the Government is failing to mark out those paths clearly for all.
I know that we are running out of time, but I want to make a point about young people in more rural areas losing out. The lack of connectivity across Government portfolios such as transport is a real issue in my area. I wanted to put that point to the cabinet secretary and to express my hope that we could work together to resolve that for people.
Lack of coherence across policy areas is one of the reasons why Scotland has the problems and skills gaps that it does. There is no significant coherence across portfolios, including transport, education and the economy, and the Government must address that crucial matter.
As I said, the fact that nearly a quarter of a million young people are not in work, and that that trend is worse in our areas of highest deprivation, is representative of the Government’s failure. That figure is not erroneous; I believe it to be a fact. It is also a scandal.
Young people’s opportunities in life should not rely on who they know. When they need advice on how to achieve their dreams, the Government and the state should be there to support them. That is before we take into account the barriers to accessing apprenticeships that still exist for many young people. There are teacher recruitment issues in key subject areas that are needed for the economy; there is a persistent gender bias, which Lorna Slater mentioned; and the numbers of disabled people engaging in apprenticeships are not what they should be.
All that bias starts in people’s early years. Of course, as many members have highlighted, demand often far outstrips supply. Angela Cox, the chair of Colleges Scotland’s college principals group, told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that far more apprenticeships could be delivered in Ayrshire, but that they have had to turn hundreds of candidates away, especially in engineering.
Alex Rowley was spot on when he highlighted the crucial role that colleges play. However, instead of colleges being supported, campuses have closed and staff have lost their jobs, with staffing levels falling to their lowest level since devolution and 30,000 fewer students benefiting from the teaching that our colleges provide.
I am afraid that, as Brian Whittle said, we have been seeing the systematic dismantling of the college sector. The Government should break the habit of almost two decades and intervene. Not to do so would be a failure to accept reality; it would also show up the lack of coherence in the system. These vital institutions have been left without leadership from the Government. In that vacuum, colleges have stepped up and published their own cases for the sector. As North East Scotland College put it in committee,
“in the absence of direction, our college ... simply cracked on”.—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 5 February 2025; c 11.]
That is not how a skills system should run. If the minister cannot even accept the facts, it is little wonder that the only response that we have to the skills gap is to rejig quangos.
While businesses are crying out for skilled staff, young people are being blocked from accessing opportunities by a system that does not work for them or for the economy, and people are failing to obtain opportunities to upskill. Scottish Labour has a plan to overhaul our broken skills system and to better link education with the world of work, so that young people and career changers across Scotland can fulfil their potential. In contrast, it is clear that the Government has no plan.
That concludes the debate on Scotland’s skills system. There will be a slight pause before we move to the next item of business to allow for a changeover of front-bench members.
Previous
Urgent QuestionNext
Education