Official Report 365KB pdf
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-20881, in the name of Pam Gosal, on a Scotland-wide ban on the use of mobile phones in schools. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes what it sees as the dangers that mobile phones and social media pose to children and young people, especially in relation to their physical and mental health; expresses concern regarding the potential safeguarding issues associated with the use of mobile phones, such as exposure to harmful content that is not age-appropriate; further expresses concern regarding reported studies that state that two in three 11- to 17-year-olds find it difficult to put down their phones, with teenagers spending, on average, five hours and 30 minutes each day on their smartphones, including four to five hours on social media, as well as research that reportedly found that one in five 16- to 18-year-olds say that social media has made them feel that “life is not worth living”; notes the calls for a Scotland-wide ban on the use of mobile phones on school premises; understands that schools across Scotland, including in the West Scotland region, and the rest of the UK that have implemented such bans have seen promising results, and that countries across Europe and around the world have taken extensive steps to limit the use of mobile phones in schools, and commends what it sees as the great work done by organisations such as Smartphone Free Childhood, Kids for Now, One Collective Power and Delay Smartphones, which are raising awareness of the potential dangers that come with mobile phone use.
12:53
I am pleased to deliver one of the final members’ business debates of this parliamentary session on a very important subject. Before I start, I would like to say a few words about my time in the Parliament over the past five years. I hope to return in May. However, just in case the stars do not align and the gods above have other plans for me, I would like to say a few words and to thank everybody who has engaged with me.
It has definitely been an interesting five years in the Parliament, during which time I have worked with colleagues from across the political parties. Sometimes that leads to agreement, and sometimes it does not. I have highlighted many important issues, including domestic abuse, the safety and protection of women and girls, education and many more. For someone who did not come from a political background or even have any friends or family in politics, it has been the absolute honour of my life to serve the country in which I was born and brought up. Here’s to not writing me off just yet. I hope to be back after 7 May.
I will now turn to the subject of the debate. I thank all the organisations and individuals who have contacted me regarding the serious issue of mobile phones in schools. My motion stems from my being contacted by concerned parents from my area in East Dunbartonshire, as well as from the round-table meeting that I hosted in Parliament last month, at which parents, teachers and experts spoke in depth about the issue. Special thanks go out to Sam Rice from Smartphone Free Childhood and Kids for Now, to Nova Eden from One Collective Power, which provided presentations to the round-table meeting, and to the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, who attended as well.
Children’s brains are still developing, which is why we have age limits on alcohol consumption, driving and consent. They are now being raised in a world that is more demanding than the one that we grew up in, and a lot of that involves the excessive use of technology and social media. Let us be clear: this is not just an education problem; it also affects health and justice, as we heard at the round-table meeting.
I am grateful to the member for hosting the round-table event that she has described, which I attended. She is quite right to frame the issue in a public health context. I believe that, in a few years’ time, we will look back on this period with an understanding that mobile phone use in schools has as damaging an effect on public health as nicotine had in the previous century.
Does the member agree that we need legislation to back headteachers and that we cannot just leave things to them but must reinforce their position through legislation that takes mobile phones out of classrooms entirely?
I absolutely agree, and the member will hear later in my speech that the Scottish Conservatives will introduce legislation to address that point in the next session of Parliament.
Smartphones and excessive social media use pose many dangers to children’s physical and mental health, and they create safeguarding issues. I will now refer to some eye-opening statistics. The average teenager today spends five and a half hours a day on their smartphone. If they continue at that pace, that will amount to 25 years of their lifetime. Teens are twice as likely to have anxiety and three times as likely to have depression as other groups, with one in five 16 to 18-year-olds saying that social media makes them feel that life is not worth living. Two out of three 11 to 17-year-olds find it difficult to put their phones down. Pre-teens lose the equivalent of a night’s sleep per week due to their use of social media. At the same time, 73 per cent of teens take their phones to bed with them.
Those statistics are shocking. At the same time, we must not forget that excessive smartphone and social media use exposes children to inappropriate content such as violence, pornography and the generation of deepfakes involving, for example, girls’ faces being put on naked bodies. Predators are not hanging around our playgrounds any more, because it is now much easier to find vulnerable children online.
We all know that, in schools, children are often distracted by their phones, which undermines their ability to focus in the classroom. Mobile devices disrupt learning and are sometimes used to record pupils, teachers and staff without their consent. We have heard in the chamber numerous examples of girls being filmed in unisex school toilets by boys. There has also been a sharp rise in road accidents and children being mugged after school as they have been walking around staring at their smartphones, completely unaware of their surroundings.
The Conservatives were the first party in Britain to support a ban on social media use for under-16s and have long backed a full ban on mobile phones in schools in Scotland. In the next session of Parliament, we will introduce a mobile phone ban bill, to ensure that pupils can focus on learning and to end the postcode lottery of differing school policies.
Current guidance that has been produced by the Scottish Government allows individual headteachers to limit the use of mobile phones as they see fit. That risks creating a postcode lottery whereby phones are banned in some schools but not in others. Luckily, some schools have implemented such bans, and the Scottish Conservatives support their efforts, as case studies have shown that such bans work. Portobello and Queensferry high schools, in Edinburgh, are taking part in a two-year trial that involves pupils locking their phones in pouches during the school day, with consultation responses showing that 97 per cent of staff and 94 per cent of parents favour limiting phone access.
North London now has more than 400 smartphone-free schools, while Northern Ireland has introduced guidance to ban or heavily restrict phone use throughout the day. Other countries, too, have or are considering a ban on the use of mobile phones in schools. Those include France, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Georgia, Malta and many others. Let us not make Scotland the last place to implement such a ban. We must be proactive in keeping our children safe while improving the quality of the education that they receive.
There will be many reasons for parents saying that their children still need mobile phones—which can easily be addressed—such as the need to contact their children during the school day or the fear that their children might feel excluded from their peers. However, on balance, mobile phones do more harm than good, and it is worth sharing good practice from schools that have moved forward with a ban.
The evidence is clear: excessive smartphone and social media use harms children’s wellbeing, safety and ability to learn. As MSPs, we all have a duty to protect young people. A ban on mobile phones in schools in Scotland is the right way forward.
I look forward to hearing the cabinet secretary’s remarks in her closing speech. I hope that she can put her back and some teeth into the issue, to give us a bit more than just the passing of guidance to schools—to make sure that we have legislation. That is what the Scottish Conservatives will bring back in the next session of Parliament, to make sure that we ban smartphones in all Scottish schools.
13:01
I thank Pam Gosal for securing this debate on a Scotland-wide ban on the use of mobile phones in schools, and I congratulate her on her powerful and comprehensive speech. As this will be my last speech before I step down, I hope that the Presiding Officer will afford me a few moments at the end of my speech to include some personal reflections on my time in the Parliament.
Undoubtedly, mobile phones bring huge benefits to the lives of children and young people: staying connected with friends and family, learning, socialising and just chilling out. Often, a family’s decision to introduce a phone involves a fine balance between the benefits and the concerns—and, perhaps, timing and costs. However, Ms Gosal’s motion reflects the concerns of many—parents, teachers, legislators, police officers and children—that overexposure to the use of mobile phones carries risks. I commend the work of many organisations to safeguard children in that space.
The harms and risks that flow from children’s mobile phone use can damage and, in some devastating cases, end lives. Those include unlimited screen time, exposure to inappropriate content and contact, bullying, peer pressure and group-based sexual abuse. In response, school bans, as part of a wider policy approach, have become more popular, with an ever-increasing number of countries introducing them. Others, such as Scotland, encourage schools to restrict and manage access.
However, at the moment, it is unclear whether bans are effective. Some consider that mobile phone use by children is so ubiquitous that bans in isolation are not enough to tackle the negative impacts. It seems that there is still some way to go to find a clear, evidence-based approach that safeguards children. I very much acknowledge the proposal by colleagues, including Pam Gosal, that it could involve legislative provision.
Another area of risk, which is often overlooked, is the exposure to extremist ideology that promotes violence, hatred and intolerance. The final years of my policing career were spent working in that space, supporting public sector organisations to understand their role in safeguarding children from exposure to extremist ideology.
As I prepare to leave the Parliament, I reflect that never in a million years did I foresee my role shifting from enforcing the law to making the law. What an utter privilege and an amazing experience it has been to be a member of our amazing Scottish Parliament. I thank a number of people for making it happen: my loving husband, Alex; my wonderful son, Sam; my parents, Bill and Jean; and my sister, Susan. I also thank Maureen Watt, who has been a mentor and friend throughout. I thank my brilliant constituency team, who went above and beyond to assist constituents who sought our help. I thank my wonderful committee clerks and the other Parliament colleagues who supported me through my five-year convenership of the Criminal Justice Committee. I thank my MSP colleagues and Parliament staff. Finally, to my constituents, I say thank you for the honour of representing you.
Having entered politics later in life, I have often found it hard to understand why we think fractious discourse and debate serve the people of Scotland. Next session, I want to observe a Parliament that rejects that approach and instead engages in strong and collegiate scrutiny of the Government as an effective legislature that prioritises improving lives, particularly the lives of our children, above soundbites and partisan deadlock. I also hope that, in the face of a turbulent new geopolitical era, we finally deliver independence for Scotland.
13:06
I thank my friend and colleague Pam Gosal for securing the debate and for the work that she has carried out on domestic abuse during the five years that she has served in this session of Parliament, which she should be proud of. I certainly would not like to be a voter in East Dunbartonshire if her team knocked on my door and I told them that I was not voting for Pam. I look forward to her being returned to Parliament.
I also pay tribute to Audrey Nicoll for an excellent speech and for her distinguished time as convener of the Criminal Justice Committee. I know how much members from across the Parliament have enjoyed being part of that committee, and her stewardship of it has been central to that.
As Audrey Nicoll touched on, we all need to understand the toxic environment that our young people are growing up in, because of the devices that they have in their hands.
Yesterday, I attended the launch of Change Mental Health’s manifesto, “Put Kids First”, which is on standing up for Scotland’s next generation. Interestingly, the two key asks of that manifesto are for a ban on mobile phones during the school day and a ban on social media for under-16s.
We are all, on a cross-party basis, acutely aware of the negative impact that phones have on our young people. I attended a round table last month to hear the views of parents and carers about the impact that phones are having on their young people. We know of cases in which young people have taken their own lives because of bullying and harassment on their mobile phones, but we also know about the negative impact that phones are having on a wider part of our young people’s development.
Statistics now show that young people spend as much time on their devices as they do sleeping. An average 10-year-old will spend more time on their device than on any aspect of their personal development. We need to understand our young people and the time that they are growing up in. I support a ban on mobile phones in schools and believe that we need to implement it urgently.
I welcome the work that Scottish Conservative councillors in the City of Edinburgh Council have done to drive the two pilots that have taken place in Portobello and in South Queensferry, which the cabinet secretary has visited. They are delivering great results for the whole school community and, most importantly, young people say that they welcome the fact that they have finally woken up to the wasted time and the negativity that social media brings to their lives. We are also seeing that pilot rolled out across primary schools.
However, a ban is not an easy solution. I know that the cabinet secretary will talk about the Education Act 1980 in her closing speech, and we need to understand that if we, as a Parliament, want to send that message about mobile phones, we will have to take the next step. It is therefore important that during the next session of Parliament, we create a bill that clearly defines the understanding that we want a national ban on mobile phones in our classrooms. There should be no more excuses on that.
We also need to send out a wider message to parents and carers. Based on a number of meetings that I have had, I know that it is not easy to ask young people to put down their phones or to implement a ban, but it is quite clear that Scotland can be world leading on that, as Australia has become.
If we understand the negative impact that phone use is having on our young people, we as a Parliament, and councils, need to take action. I hope that there will be cross-party action early in the next session of Parliament. I think that our manifestos will demand that. If we do not do that, the negative impact—as Alex Cole-Hamilton touched on—of this growing public health emergency is absolutely clear.
I hope that this debate has started the action that is needed to deliver a ban and that members in the next session of Parliament will do just that.
13:10
I am pleased to contribute to the debate, and in doing so, I thank Pam Gosal for bringing the issue to the chamber, and I wish her well. Pam was one of the first MSPs I met when I was elected to this place; we were in the same little group on the first day. Her leadership of the cross-party group on India, of which I have been a deputy convener, has been very important in this Parliament, particularly to the wider Indian diaspora across our region and elsewhere.
Since coming into the education brief, I have been fairly consistent in saying that tackling the wider issues surrounding today’s debate, such as violence and disruption in our schools, must come first and foremost, because that will provide the foundation for everything else that goes on in the classroom and in the wider school environment.
Given that it is the last day of the parliamentary session and that we are about to enter an election period, colleagues will expect some politics from me. It is clear that the Government has failed to grip these issues during this session. Indeed, this weekend, a response to a freedom of information request from local authorities across Scotland showed that the number of reported incidents of pupil-on-teacher violence has more than doubled over this parliamentary session.
In my region, that means that in places such as Renfrewshire, things are spiralling somewhat out of control, with recorded incidents in primary schools increasing more than fivefold since 2022-23. Obviously, there are multifaceted reasons for that, and we need to understand those, but that is not an excuse for ignoring the very clear problems that surround the use of digital technology and what young people are being exposed to in online spaces. That is why my party was one of the first to call for a nationwide ban on mobile phones in the classroom. It is clearly part of a toolbox and a package of solutions to deal with those issues and give young people better opportunities and a better start to their school life.
Other actions need to sit alongside a ban, however; it would not, in isolation, be a silver bullet. That is why we have advocated for a national charter on behaviour and standards and national leadership on discipline in schools, to empower headteachers to set out consequences, look at the issue of community partners such as campus cops and restore the relationships that now do not exist in many local authorities. We have also advocated for improving workforce planning, so that support staff meet the needs of pupils, and for ensuring that schools have funding certainty, so that they can offer teachers and education staff permanent or long-term contracts, in order to address the scandal of qualified teachers being unable to work.
It is clear to me that a range of solutions are required in the next session of Parliament to make an impact on the problems that exist in relation to violence and behaviour. It is clear that any ban on phones will have to involve young people. They will have to help to co-design it and they will have to be at the heart of how we implement it—we should not forget that in the debate.
There are already myriad discussions about how we might do that. I know that the cabinet secretary will say that she feels that she does not have the power. Some advocate for a new piece of legislation, but I would advocate for looking at the legislation that we already have. There needs to be a wider discussion about powers that have not been used, such as those in the Education (Scotland) Act 2016, and the duties that we place on chief education officers in local authorities to implement and enforce certain things.
Given the day, I pay tribute to Audrey Nicoll, who has made her final speech of the parliamentary session. Her work with me and others across committees on drug deaths and drug harms was very important. I hope that we will all continue to focus on that in the next session of Parliament. She can be assured that her contribution in that space is very valued.
I also pay tribute to you, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is perhaps the last time that you will chair a debate in the chamber that I am involved in, and I wish you all the very best for what comes next.
I reflected, when speaking to you yesterday, on the fact that your dear mother was the first person to sit in that chair. It has always stuck with me that it must be so important to you that, over our five years in Parliament, you have been able to do the same thing. I am sure that many of us who watched the first day of proceedings in 1999 never thought that we would sit in the chamber and help to form the next part of the story of the Scottish Parliament.
I appreciate that I am now saying nice things to indulge you, Deputy Presiding Officer, so that I get a wee bit more time, but I am about to conclude. I leave the chamber with two important points. The politics over the next wee while will be fierce and intense, so I will quote two Johns—neither of them are who members might think, before we go there. They are two of my political heroes. One is John Hume, who said that when people are
“divided … the only solution is agreement.”
We need to find those solutions in the next session of Parliament, in particular in education.
The second is John Smith, who said:
“The opportunity to serve … is all we ask”.
That is all that we—those of us who are standing again—are asking, and I wish everyone well.
Thank you, Mr O’Kane, for your kind words.
13:15
In following that fine contribution, I, too, pay tribute to Audrey Nicoll. I have always genuinely enjoyed listening to her contributions, especially given their precision. The lack of aggression in her contributions was commendable, and she has added considerably to the chamber over the past five years.
I also pay tribute to Pam Gosal for leading this debate. We do not know whether any of us will be back in Parliament, but I welcome her contribution.
Finally, I pay tribute to you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Your contribution has been notable, in particular in making the case, right up to the end of the session, for the Lochgelly health centre—it must get built, or I know that you will be on our backs.
Hear, hear.
We have looked at the issue of mobile phones, and I have been clear about the damaging effects that I think that they have in the classroom. However, we need to broaden the debate slightly. We see the roll-out of digital devices in the school environment, and there are big questions about whether children, and which age group, should be using those devices, and how they should do so.
On Monday, I met with a group called Unplug.Scot, because in Fife there has been an accelerated roll-out of digital devices from primary 5 onward. The group is deeply concerned about a number of practical things; I will go through some of those first and then go on to the wider issues around the use of digital devices and mobile phones.
Unplug.Scot is concerned, first and foremost, about parental consent, because parents are being encouraged—and almost coerced—into signing a form to say that their child can bring their digital device home. Parents have no choice about whether those devices will be used in the classroom, but they have an option to sign to bring them home. If they refuse to sign, they are warned that their child might lose out, with no justification as to how they are going to lose out or what other steps will be taken to make sure that they do not lose out.
The group is concerned that there is no equality impact assessment on the roll-out of these devices, and it is not convinced about the robustness of the filters that are used on them or whether virtual private networks can be used to circumvent those devices, too.
Those are some of the group’s practical concerns, but it has a wider concern about the evidence that has been drawn on to justify the roll-out of these devices.
I have pursued the matter with Fife Council on a number of occasions and it is quite firm that it believes that there are some significant advantages. However, that has to be countered with the experience of countries such as Sweden, which has decided to roll back the use of these devices and return to physical books, because there have been concerns about the impact on learning and performance in the Swedish education system. Equally, we have heard education leaders across the United Kingdom express such concerns.
To return to the situation in Fife, the education director is clear that, having looked at what has happened in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and in the Borders, they see a significant improvement in performance in areas such as maths if the use is limited to an hour. I think that there are, again, questions about exactly how much these devices are used. They can also provide instant feedback and make sure that parents are able to see instantly how their child is performing at school with the portfolio system that is in place.
All of that should be thoroughly investigated before we take any legislative steps to control the use of mobile phones.
The member says that we should take our time, but the problems are happening right now and we need to act now. As I said in my speech, there is already so much good practice going on, so why do we have to look at everything? I think we should be moving on.
On the subject of good practice, the member spoke about Sweden and I have looked at that example. They spent a lot of money on technology, but they practically binned that to go back to good old-fashioned learning and the children are actually enjoying that. I know that my colleague Brian Whittle is going to cover the subject of activity. Does the member believe that we should be looking at the good practice that is happening?
I do think we should do that, but this debate has been quite narrowly about mobile phones when I think that we need to look at all the digital tools that we have available to us. I am not against the use of some digital tools as long as we can be absolutely clear about the evidence. The Education, Children and Young People Committee has not looked at that subject in the past five years, but I think that we should have looked at it and the next Parliament should do that with some urgency. I am in favour of acting at speed, while also ensuring that we take a comprehensive look at all those things.
I favour a ban on the use of mobile phones in the classroom and think that the Government here should lead on that, rather than leaving it up to headteachers. However, we need a comprehensive plan for moving forward.
13:21
This extremely important subject is more pressing than many of the things that we debate in Parliament, and I thank Pam Gosal for bringing it to the chamber.
We know that schools, and the teachers and pupils in them, face a range of challenges, which we also know are not exclusive to Scotland. Across the UK and beyond, authorities are really struggling to deal with the growing influence and impact of social media and the toxicity that accompanies mobile phones. We cannot control everything, but we can control what is allowed in classrooms. Every teacher I have spoken to agrees that phones must be banned from the classroom. Most parents agree, and many children are actually on board so long as the policy is fair and absolute, with no exceptions.
As a parent, I instinctively know that the concerns relating to smart phones are completely legitimate. Anyone with eyes and ears can see the harm and distractions that those devices cause for young people, and there is also hard evidence. The organisation One Collective Power, which campaigns for the welfare and wellbeing of schoolchildren across the country, has presented some extremely powerful statistics, including that the average teenager spends five and a half hours on their device each day, that phones and social media increase the likelihood of depression, especially in girls, and that kids at smartphone-free schools have higher levels of attainment. The position should be obvious to us all: phones in schools fuel distraction and conflict, pose nightmare scenarios for teachers and inflict harm in almost every area of the school, from classrooms and corridors to the playground.
That is not the children’s fault, nor is it exclusive to them. We adults also struggle to put our phones down when we know we should. We have all kept watching videos and clips and kept scrolling for far longer than is healthy. Even during long debates in this chamber, we can see members checking their devices rather than engaging with the content at hand—we are all at it. There is a role for grown-ups in setting an example rather than pretending that the issue affects only children.
The solution is in front of us. There should be an outright ban, across the whole country, on phones in schools, with no exceptions, exemptions or compromise. The Scottish Government has said that headteachers have the power to impose a ban in any case, but we must go further and give them our full support. MSPs, MPs, local councillors and people of influence must all get behind a ban, because that will make it easier for teachers to enforce and will send a clear signal to pupils and parents that the rules are clear and unambiguous.
We would soon see the benefits. Teachers have already told me that when children do not have their phones, their engagement improves. They learn better and take part in more activities. Remarkably, they even start speaking to one another. They improve their communication skills. They make new friendships and cement existing ones. They go back to having a life that is not lived on the tiny screen in front of them.
From the minute a pupil walks into a school, there should be no mobile phones in sight. That is what the teachers want and what the children need. That is why I am delighted to give this motion my full and unequivocal support.
Since I have finished within my four minutes of time, I would like to say good luck to Audrey Nicoll, who I have had the pleasure of working with on the Criminal Justice Committee for the past session. To you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and to everyone else who is leaving, I wish good luck in the future.
13:25
I thank my colleague Pam Gosal not only for bringing this important debate to the chamber, but for telling me what I need to speak about for the next four minutes.
We are all very aware of the significant impact on health that the use of social media and smartphones can have, especially on our youngsters’ brain development. One thing that I want to talk about, which has not been spoken about yet, is how we engage with youths to make them part of the decision making. Youth organisations consistently say that decision makers must include young people in conversations about safe social media use and support them to participate meaningfully in the digital world and with new emerging technologies.
I was speaking with a girl guide leader—let us call her Kaley from my office—who told me that leaders and girls in her unit create rules together, including rules on mobile phones. In her unit, the girls unanimously voted to ban phones during the unit meetings, and she told me that that has been replicated across the other units that she knows.
We are very good at banning things and taking things away from youths without involving them in those decisions. I also think that what we are talking about doing in this debate is not too far removed from what the youth of today want themselves. It is interesting that the girls attitudes survey carried out by Girlguiding UK in 2025 found that girls are restricting their online activity in order to protect themselves, with more than a third of respondents reporting that they avoid using certain apps and platforms in order to protect themselves. More than two fifths of the young people surveyed think that more needs to be done to ensure that they are safe online. Girls are disproportionately affected, with over a third of 11 to 21-year-old girls saying that
“they often feel depressed after spending time on social media.”
To put the issue in context, we have to understand that those who were born in the early 2000s will never have known a life without social media. Those who were born from the 2010s onwards will never have known a life without smartphones. Speaking as somebody who got his first mobile phone—a brick of a thing—at the age of 32, I find that quite astonishing.
It is important that pupils have the opportunity to put their phones down in school, but also important is what happens outside school. We must remember that children have access to smartphones and social media when the school day is over. What are we doing to educate them on their safe usage, to model positive behaviour and to discourage misogyny online?
I talked about what I learned from a girl guides leader, which was about activities that they have decided they will put their phones down for. It would not be a speech by me, Deputy Presiding Officer, if I did not slide sport into it. I have never known of, nor ever seen, somebody dribbling a basketball down a basketball court while scrolling through social media. I have never seen anybody play piano while scrolling through social media. It is not just about what we want to limit in terms of mobile phone usage, but about what we are offering as an alternative to encourage young people into other activities.
It is also not necessarily just our children we need to persuade; we also need to persuade parents that it is a good idea. It used to be that, when parents wanted to contact their children at school, they phoned the office. If children wanted to contact their parents, they, too, did so through the office. We need to consider all of that in the round.
It is not like me to agree with Willie Rennie on much, but on this issue I do. If we are going to restrict or ban mobile phones in schools, which I fully support, we must ensure that other things are available to our children that take their attention away from their phones.
13:30
Who, on the Conservative benches, says that we cannot occasionally agree with Willie Rennie? I agree with him about the use of old technology—books. It would be a great idea to have books in our classrooms and homes again. I hope that it catches on, and I hope that this new-old technology thing takes off in a big way. I love books.
I agree with Brian Whittle about banning things. I am incredibly reluctant to talk about banning anything, because I am afraid that Parliament’s reputation is that if it is not taxing things, it is banning them. Frankly, I do not think that that enhances the reputation of our Parliament. However, there are some situations in which we need to take cognisance of the realities in relation to the power of new technology—and it is a power. Brian Whittle is right when he says that we need to teach each other and the rising younger generations about the power of new technology—how to harness it and use it to our benefit. That, as ever, was a useful contribution from Brian Whittle. Inevitably, he introduced the world of sport, too.
However, this is no longer a debate about preference or guidance; it is about whether we are prepared to act in the face of clear and growing evidence that mobile phones are damaging the learning environment in our schools. In Scotland, we have chosen to rely on local discretion. That may sound sensible, and I understand the attraction of that course of action, but, in practice, it has meant inconsistency, uncertainty and not nearly enough backing for teachers on the ground.
Meanwhile, the situation in classrooms has moved on. Scottish Government research identifies mobile phones as a significant and growing source of disruption. Teachers are dealing with constant interruptions, fractured attention and time lost to managing behaviour that should not be an issue in the first place. That matters, because every moment lost to distraction is a moment taken away from learning. Standards do not slip overnight; they erode gradually, lesson by lesson, when focus is no longer protected.
Let us be clear about what we are asking schools to compete with. Phones are not neutral tools; they are devices designed to capture our attention. I do not need to tell MSPs about the captivating powers of a mobile phone, which we see at every moment in the chamber. Douglas Lumsden just put his phone down, which is a very good thing. They are designed to interrupt and keep young people—in fact, any people—engaged elsewhere. It is simply not reasonable to expect teachers to win that battle on their own.
Other countries have recognised that and have acted decisively. Across Europe and beyond, national restrictions are now commonplace. Where phones have been removed from the school day, the results are consistent: improved focus, calmer classrooms and better behaviour. We can see the same in Scotland in places where schools and councils have taken firm action.
Ministers know that there is a problem—I have heard the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills speak on the subject. They say so, but, for some strange reason, they have chosen not to act in a national direction. The question is straightforward: do we continue with the fragmented approach that leaves teachers to carry the burden, or do we provide the clarity, authority and back-up that a national position would bring? A Scotland-wide ban, with clear and sensible exemptions—because they will need to exist—would do exactly that. It would set a consistent standard and back our teachers. It would restore the classroom as a place where attention is given to learning, not to a screen for some other purpose. This is about leadership, standards and whether we are serious about giving every child the environment that they need to succeed. The case is made and the evidence is there. The time to act is now.
If this is to be my last contribution in the Scottish Parliament, I am delighted that it was on a subject that will matter so much to the future of our country.
13:35
I thank Pam Gosal for bringing this debate to Parliament and for sponsoring the recent round-table discussion on the topic, which I was pleased to attend, along with colleagues from across the Parliament.
There is now a growing consensus on the issue. We all share concerns about the impact of mobile phones and screen time on our children and young people. We know that it is causing them harm, anxiety and some real mental health challenges. Some are groomed and abused sexually online and also physically. We need to be mindful of this growing threat.
Colleagues are aware of the Government’s current position on these matters. Back in 2024, the Government published updated national guidance in which I was clear that any headteacher would have my full backing as Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills should they see fit to implement a ban, but that decision was ultimately left to headteachers’ discretion. However, there is a growing consensus that more action needs to be taken in this space.
I will mention some of the points that have been made in the debate, in which there have been a number of similarities.
I believe that the cabinet secretary has found common ground with the consensus that is emerging in this debate. However, does she recognise that an act of this Parliament is sometimes required to create the kind of cultural shift that we are talking about, as it was for the ban on smoking in public places? Does she agree that we need to back our headteachers by underpinning the guidance with legislation that will give them the confidence to have those discussions with families and, culturally, will mean that we all understand that it is no longer acceptable to have mobile phones in classrooms?
I very much recognise Mr Cole-Hamilton’s point, which is reflective of a growing ask from Parliament for more national direction. We saw that only yesterday with stage 3 of Mr Johnson’s Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill. On that topic, the Government had published updated non-statutory national guidance, but there was an ask from Parliament and stakeholders for us to be much clearer on providing direction, and we legislated for that yesterday.
Pam Gosal was absolutely right to point to the fact that children’s brains are still developing. That was a common theme throughout the debate. Members spoke about the public health implications, which Mr Cole-Hamilton also touched on. We discussed that matter at the Cabinet table only yesterday, as the First Minister mentioned at First Minister’s question time.
As adults, we need to be mindful, too, of our use of technology and how it is affecting us all. Sharon Dowey touched on that. In previous debates relating to mobile phones, I have mentioned how we interact in this place and how we listen to each other, or not. This morning, I was at a fabulous visit in Wester Hailes with Sistema Scotland and the little noise programme, and the chief executive pointed out to me the importance of creating such screen-free spaces for mums and dads to come along with their babies, where wee ones can play and listen to one other, without having phones there.
Pam Gosal mentioned the number of schools that are now moving to implement bans, supported by the Government’s approach to setting out our views on mobile phone technology in schools. It is fair to say that, as I alluded to, the policy landscape has shifted since 2024, when I updated the national guidance to make our expectations on mobile phones clear. Now, not only on mobile phones but on restraint, as I mentioned, and in relation to Liz Smith’s Schools (Residential Outdoor Education) (Scotland) Bill, there are growing asks from Parliament. The next Government will have to consider legislative change in our schools, which is one of the reasons why I have committed to the wider John Wilson review of our approach to school education.
Miles Briggs alluded to the Education (Scotland) Act 1980, which is a piece of legislation that I have cited on many occasions.
I have been speaking to the councils in my West Scotland region, and one of the things that they asked for when I brought up the subject was clear direction—guidance, legislation or whatever you want to call it—from Government. That is what they need. Headteachers have a fear of going ahead with something that they do not have your backing for. It is good to hear you say that you see cross-party consensus on the matter, but if you come back into Government, will you commit to making sure that we look at banning mobile phones in schools, and will you provide that direction to schools through legislation?
I remind the member to always speak through the chair.
I remind Pam Gosal that the foreword from me at the front of the national guidance document makes it very clear that any headteacher will have my backing as cabinet secretary should they see fit to implement a ban but that, ultimately, the decision as to whether to do so is at their disposal. That is because we trust headteachers, who know our schools, to take such decisions.
There is a wider, political, point to be made on this issue. I do not want to prejudge what might come from any political manifestos in this space, but I hope that Pam Gosal can hear that I am seriously considering wider action in this space.
I want to pay tribute to Audrey Nicoll, to her final contribution in the Scottish Parliament and to her service as the constituency member for Aberdeen South and North Kincardine. Audrey Nicoll has played a key role in convening the Criminal Justice Committee throughout this parliamentary session, and her contributions in the chamber, as Willie Rennie alluded to, have always been thoughtful, intelligent and well reasoned. People listen when Audrey Nicoll speaks, and she will be much missed on the Scottish National Party benches and in the Scottish Parliament when she leaves us.
Miles Briggs spoke about the impact of mobile phone devices on childhood development and children changing but the pace of technology not necessarily keeping pace with what is happening in our schools. It is important to put on the record that the Government has today published the first online safety action plan, which is part of our response to those emerging issues. The action plan is the outcome of a task force that was led by Natalie Don-Innes and Siobhian Brown. I thank both ministers for their vital work in bringing together partners and stakeholders to ensure that the Government has delivered action on the matter before the Parliament rises.
Paul O’Kane was quite right to say that a ban in isolation is not the answer. If colleagues speak to headteachers about how they have gone about implementing bans, they will find that doing so takes time. The headteacher at Portobello high school, for example, took nine months to implement a ban. Doing so involved engagement with parents and pupils. Getting buy-in and support for the approach took time—it could not happen overnight.
I might be the only MSP in the chamber who has ever confiscated a mobile phone from a 15-year-old boy. Such situations can be fractious. It is important that we remember that headteachers and teachers are dealing with young people and that behaviour is sometimes a challenge in our schools, as we heard from Mr Kerr. It is important that we support teachers in responding to those matters accordingly. In itself, a national ban will not provide the resolution that Pam Gosal wants. We need to think about wider behavioural change, too.
Willie Rennie made some interesting points about digital technology and potentially limiting the time for certain subjects. I agree with his comments about the narrowness of the debate thus far. The question that is worth asking is whether a national ban, were we to introduce legislative change in the next parliamentary session, would be enough for our schools. If the next Government is to legislate on school education, we need to be much more ambitious than simply considering a mobile phone ban.
Sharon Dowey rightly spoke about adult use of technology, as I alluded to. We also need to be mindful of our own behaviour in the chamber.
Brian Whittle spoke more broadly about the need for us to engage with young people. It was helpful for us to hear yesterday from the outgoing chair of the Scottish Youth Parliament, Ellie Craig, who delivered time for reflection. Paul O’Kane talked about girls restricting their actions on certain apps to protect themselves. That made me reflect on the fact that—I do not know whether he has noticed this—a number of female members of the Cabinet have now taken themselves off the platform known as X. We have taken action to protect ourselves in our roles. It is a gendered issue, as anyone who has seen the recent “Manosphere” documentary on Netflix will attest to. We need to be mindful of that in our schools when we talk about mobile phone technology, because girls experience it in different ways, and the majority of our teaching profession is also female.
Mr Kerr spoke more broadly about local discretion, which, in practice, he argued, leads to variation. I agree, but that is a feature of our education system—currently. It need not be under a future Parliament.
Cabinet secretary, I appreciate that you are trying to respond to everybody, but I am conscious of the next debate and of the fact that all the members are here and ready for that to go ahead. Perhaps you could bring your remarks to a close.
I apologise. However, I want to pay tribute to you, too, for your service to the people of Cowdenbeath. [Laughter.] I shared Mr Rennie’s smile as you advocated for Lochgelly health centre. You were always very supportive towards me when I was first elected 10 years ago, and you will be much missed on the SNP benches, too.
Presiding Officer, I want to very briefly comment on an individual parliamentarian who is sitting to my left and who is about to respond to the final members’ business debate of this session—Mairi Gougeon. Mairi and I were both elected a decade ago, in 2016. She has been an outstanding Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands; she has been an outstanding constituency MSP for the people of Angus North and Mearns; and she has been an outstanding friend. I will miss her dearly when she leaves us.
It will be for our next Parliament and Government to consider whether they wish to institute a national ban on mobile phones in schools. I hope that I return to play my part in that debate and decision.
That concludes the debate. There will be a short pause before we move on to the next item of business.