Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, April 25, 2023

Official Report 925KB pdf

---

Topical Question Time

---

Car Use Reduction (Investment)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to a recent report by Friends of the Earth Scotland, which suggests that additional investment is required in public transport if the Scottish Government is to meet its target of reducing car kilometres by 20 per cent by 2030. (S6T-01336)

The Scottish Government recognises that reaching our target of a 20 per cent reduction in car kilometres by 2030 will require a broad combination of interventions, including infrastructure, incentives and disincentives, and we know that, to reduce car use, public transport has to be available, affordable and accessible. As part of the fair fares review, a six-month pilot to remove ScotRail peak fares on all routes will start in October. In addition, £421.8 million has been allocated in funding for bus services and concessionary fares in 2023-24 to provide up to 2.3 million people in Scotland with access to free bus travel. That is part of a total of over £2 billion spent on supporting public transport by the Scottish Government annually.

The report makes clear the scale of the potential costs required to achieve the Scottish Government’s target of around £1.7 billion per year for the next 12 years purely for capital investment in new rail services, new zero-carbon buses, new tram systems and new light rail networks. So far, the Scottish Government has not given any indication of how it intends to practically address that issue. Does the minister accept that nothing close to that level of investment will be possible without significant private sector support? How does the Scottish Government plan to obtain that?

It would be extremely helpful if the United Kingdom Government and the Treasury began to loosen the purse strings and invest in infrastructure to allow all of us to reach our net zero targets. It really is a matter for Government to play its part. The Scottish Government is doing that; I suggest that the UK Government is not.

Mr Whittle is right that we all have a part to play, including the private sector. We will do what we can to encourage the private sector to play its part in our net zero ambitions. However, that would be much easier if the UK Government did its bit.

The Scottish Government is doing what it always does: it is deflecting away from its responsibilities.

Although there is a clear need to reduce emissions from modes of transport that are powered by internal combustion, does the minister accept that there is a serious risk of policies in that area being developed in a highly city-centric way, which could disadvantage rural areas as a poor relation when it comes to investment in new transport infrastructure and by prioritising travel for those who live inside cities ahead of those who travel into them from elsewhere?

No, the Government will not be city centric in its policy interventions. We recognise that there are different factors at play in our rural areas. That is why we recognise that there will be more car usage in rural areas. There will also be car usage by folks with blue badges, for example. We have to tailor our policies to meet the needs of all of Scotland, and that is what we will do.

Does the minister agree that the Conservatives need to be a bit more realistic about where the money might come from and that, if we had a better fiscal framework with the UK, that would be a big help in the first instance?

I agree entirely with John Mason. We need increased fiscal flexibility, including additional borrowing powers. The latest gross domestic product deflators published by the Office for Budget Responsibility show that our core capital funding from the UK Government will fall by over 16 per cent in real terms by 2024-25 compared with 2021-22. That represents a steep decline in the buying power of our investment. Coupled with the current impact of high inflation, that places significant additional pressures on our capital programme.

As members know, we also have limited capital borrowing powers, and Scotland is constrained by reliance on the UK Government for capital grant allocations, which have failed to respond to meet the need for infrastructure to support Scotland’s net zero emission targets. The UK Government needs to step up to the plate and loosen those purse strings.

Friends of the Earth Scotland’s report, “On the Move: Investing in public transport to meet carbon targets and create jobs” highlights how, through increased capital investment in public transport, the Scottish Government could create 22,000 jobs directly and 416,000 jobs indirectly. In the Scottish National Party leadership campaign, the now First Minister made it clear in his response to the pledge for rail campaign by the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers that his Government would be committed to investment in our railway. Will the minister therefore once and for all rule out cuts to ScotRail ticket offices, which threaten rail jobs and services?

We will continue to invest in our national railway. It is now more than a year since ScotRail was nationalised, which I am pleased about. That is good for all—for ScotRail, for its staff and, most important, for passengers. I reiterate that it would be much easier to increase capital investment if the Treasury did what is required and invested in our net zero ambitions.

Alongside numerous UK Climate Change Committee reports, the Friends of the Earth report shows us that, without decisive action to reduce the number of cars on the roads, we will not achieve our legally binding targets, which this Parliament voted for. Does the transport minister agree that traffic demand management measures are an essential tool to reduce transport emissions and raise revenue? Will he provide an update on what correspondence ministers have had with the UK Government on the need for such measures?

I agree with Mr Ruskell and the UK Climate Change Committee that we need to deter car use, which should be accompanied by investment in active travel and public transport. The need for all that is set out in the route map for a 20 per cent reduction in car kilometres by 2030.

At ministerial and official level, we have continued to seek engagement on the issues that the UK Climate Change Committee has raised, but the UK Government has yet to give the devolved nations clarity on whether it plans to reform motoring taxes and, if so, when. We know that reforms to transport taxes will be crucial to meeting net zero targets. If the UK Government does not want to act on that, it should devolve responsibility for such matters to this Parliament, so that we can do the right thing.

---

International Students (Homelessness)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to a recent report by the National Union of Students Scotland, which stated that more than a fifth of international students in Scotland have experienced homelessness during their studies. (S6T-01335)

Scotland welcomes international students from all over the world; they are an important part of our student community. The report raises significant issues that I know universities will take seriously as they seek to have robust plans in place to assist students in finding accommodation.

I congratulate the minister on his new position. This is international students week, but thousands of students across Scotland are still struggling through the housing crisis without help from the Scottish Government. In my members’ business debate last week, I addressed the huge number of houses that are mould infested and dangerous. Landlords and letting agents are refusing to deal with damp and mould, and it is again students who are suffering, as they cannot afford to live anywhere else. What is being done to hold landlords and letting agents to account for structural repairs and damp control in private rented accommodation?

I thank Foysol Choudhury for his kind words. The issue is really important, and I will take a moment to address it. As members know, the Scottish Government has no direct role in the provision of student residential accommodation, but we are determined to improve accessibility, affordability and standards in purpose-built student accommodation, which we can influence.

Students should not be disadvantaged in the housing market. The review that is under way has looked at key issues such as accessibility, affordability and standards, as I said. The expert group has involved the NUS, and I look forward to receiving the group’s recommendations soon.

On the wider issue in the private sector that the member has highlighted, during the next few weeks and months, I will be speaking to ministerial colleagues about what we can do in that regard.

NUS Scotland’s study also found that 29 per cent of international students have considered leaving their course because of financial difficulties, and, shockingly, that 49 per cent skipped meals due to their financial circumstances.

In January, I hosted a round-table event on student housing in the Parliament, where many international students told me that they have faced racism from private landlords when looking for affordable housing. If they cannot secure a United Kingdom-based guarantor, purpose-built student accommodation is the only option for many of them. Such accommodation often has associated difficulties, including term length, and it is far too expensive for most students to afford. Will the minister agree to meet me to discuss the housing situation of international students in Scotland?

I would be absolutely delighted to meet the member to discuss the issue further. Let me be absolutely clear: if there is a sense that there is any racism at play, that would be completely unacceptable.

As this is my first opportunity to do so, I, too, wish the minister well in his new role.

Representatives of the Indian student community have highlighted that a shortage of accommodation is a serious issue for international students in Scotland. Some students have reported being advised to return to India for a whole semester if they were unable to secure accommodation. Others have had to sleep in their friends’ hallways until they find accommodation of their own. What is the Government doing to ensure that that issue does not make Scotland a less attractive destination for international students?

I thank Pam Gosal for her kind words.

If there is an issue specific to Indian students, I am happy to discuss that with the member. In addition to my previous comments, I note that, over the next few weeks and months, I will be meeting principals—members can imagine that I am quite popular at the moment, with principals wanting to meet me. If members identify hotspots where there are issues, I would be more than happy to discuss that and to put that on the agenda of my meetings with principals in those universities. I am more than happy to discuss the matter further with Pam Gosal.

I, too, welcome the minister to his new role. The findings of the report are deeply concerning. I appreciate that the Scottish Government is carrying out a review of the provision of purpose-built student accommodation and the sector to inform a student accommodation strategy for Scotland. Will the minister provide details on the scope of the review? Does he agree with me that the responsibility lies with universities, which, as private institutions, have a duty to look after their students’ wellbeing?

Yes, responsibility primarily lies with universities. However, last week, I met students from multiple universities in the Edinburgh area. I was extremely encouraged to hear about the emphasis that those universities place on the wellbeing of students. They do some good work in that area.

On the review, the scope was fairly wide ranging. I am awaiting the recommendations of the group and will consider those carefully. We want to provide a response that sets out strategic priorities for student accommodation that is informed by the challenges that the students in question are facing.

I do not think that the minister really understands the severity of the problem. We have more international students than ever before and we have got a housing crisis, particularly for students. He cannot really wash his hands of the matter. I am sure that he will get involved directly with universities; however, the matter is a direct responsibility for Government. It must get the balance right. Our international reputation could be damaged if we do not sort out this international student housing crisis. Does he understand that?

I do not think that I indicated, in any way or in any of my answers, that I am washing my hands of the matter. I simply stated a fact: primary responsibility for the issue lies with individual universities. However, as I have laid out, we are doing work in this area.

Yes—Willie Rennie is right to talk about getting the balance right, and I am happy to have conversations with him if he has specific issues that he wants to raise with me on the matter.

---

Scottish Qualifications Authority (Examinations Preparation)

To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with the SQA regarding the preparations for this year’s exams. (S6T-01332)

The SQA operates at arm’s length from ministers and is responsible for its own operational decisions and planning, including preparations for exams. Notwithstanding that, Scottish ministers and officials are kept informed through regular meetings. I met the chief executive and the chair of the SQA last Wednesday, 19 April.

Exams have now started and will continue until 31 May. Across Scotland, about 130,000 school pupils and learners will be sitting national 5, higher and advanced higher exams in a variety of subjects. I wish them every success, and I thank the SQA, teachers, lecturers, parents and carers for all the support that they are providing.

I welcome the cabinet secretary to her role.

For our young people, exams represent the culmination of a lot of hard work. The disruption that was caused by the pandemic had a clear impact on previous exam diets, so what specific measures has the SQA taken to ensure that this year’s exam diet runs smoothly and gives our young people the platform to demonstrate their talents and hard work?

It is worth putting on the record that the modifications to the 2022 national qualifications continued into this year’s exam diet in recognition of the on-going impacts of the pandemic, which Bill Kidd mentioned. The modifications vary by subject and by level, but they include removing or reducing elements of exams or course work, giving more choice or time during assessments and removing topics entirely from exams.

In addition, the SQA has confirmed that it will continue this year to use a sensitive evidence-based approach to grading. As was the case last year, that approach will be grounded in evidence and will take into consideration the significant modifications that have been made to national course assessments.

The SQA has also confirmed that there will be a free and direct appeals service, which will give all learners the right to request a review of their marked exam papers. That service will be available this year for the first time. In addition, in exceptional circumstances a service will exist for those who are unable to sit an exam or whose performance on the day is impacted by personal circumstances.

An evidence-based overhaul of our qualifications system gives us the chance to think about the ways in which we assess progress and measure achievement. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s indication that those ways might look radically different. Does she agree that any new qualifications system should be designed to draw out the diverse range of talents and abilities that exist among our young people?

I agree with the sentiment behind Bill Kidd’s question. The aim of Professor Hayward’s independent review of qualifications and assessment is to ensure that all senior phase school pupils and learners have an equal and enhanced opportunity to demonstrate their learning. Back in October 2021, the review was announced by my predecessor in response to concerns about curriculum content in the senior phase being driven by high-stakes exams, rather than by the provision of a rich and rounded educational experience. That was, of course, one of the precursors to curriculum for excellence, as was the potential overreliance on exams. Those points were drawn out in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s subsequent report.

We will continue to engage with the national discussion that will come forward shortly. The output from that will be invaluable in determining where we go next in respect of exams.

Professor Hayward’s independent review is still under way. The interim report was published at the start of March, and I expect to receive the final report at the end of May. I will meet Professor Hayward tomorrow to discuss her work in more detail. I commend her very much for her hard work and for the engagement that she has undertaken with young people, the profession and people across the education system. Her final report will deserve and require detailed consideration by the Government.

I, too, welcome the cabinet secretary to her role, and I echo what has been said about pupils and students who will be sitting their exams over the next few weeks.

This year, teacher strikes across Scotland caused significant disruption for pupils and students, who missed many days of school, including during their prelims. For many pupils, this will be the first time that they have ever sat an exam, but they have been badly let down by the Scottish National Party Government. I have been contacted by parents who fear that their children might not have received the support that they needed.

Will the cabinet secretary detail what catch-up lessons and support, such as tutors, were provided for pupils who were most affected by the strikes? Is she confident that the support that has been provided will make up for the lost learning time?

I look forward to working with Ms Gallacher in due course. She has raised a number of concerns; I am more than happy to look at them in more detail. I am aware that support has been put in place, very much in recognition of the points that the member raises in relation to industrial action. There is the national e-learning offer, which provides thousands of live, recorded and supported online resources, including lessons. That support and study revision can be accessed independently by young people at a time that suits them.

The SQA has issued the “Your National Qualifications” and the “Your Exams” booklets, which include study and exam tips. The SQA has also confirmed that a free and direct appeals service, which will give all learners a direct right of access to an appeal, will be available this year. That is a significant change to how the SQA administers appeals. In addition, as I outlined in my response to Bill Kidd, provision will be put in place in relation to exceptional circumstances.

It goes without saying that throughout the Easter holiday period a number of teachers will have been running study classes to support their pupils in preparing for the exams.

As I said, if Ms Gallacher has more information in relation to the concerns that she has raised, I will be more than happy to look at it in more detail and raise the matter with the SQA, should that be needed.

I welcome the cabinet secretary to her new role, and I look forward to working with her.

Yesterday, the SQA exam diet started, and I wish young people across the country the very best of luck. Of course, the SQA itself is going through a significant and necessary review. The Muir review suggested taking accreditation and regulation out of the SQA. The previous education cabinet secretary ignored that advice and said that the Scottish National Party Government intended to leave both functions in the new qualifications board, thereby directly contradicting one of the recommendations in the Muir report. Will the new cabinet secretary review that decision and reassure us that the Scottish Government is listening to experts and is fully committed to genuine education reform, rather than simply to a rebrand with the old management still in place?

I look forward very much to working with Ms Duncan-Glancy on education.

The member raises a number of issues. It is worth pointing out that, as well as the Muir report, we have the OECD recommendations and, as I mentioned, the national discussion. Furthermore, at the end of next month, we will have Professor Hayward’s independent review of qualifications. More broadly, it is really important that I, as cabinet secretary, listen to the profession. Last week, I spent some time listening to former colleagues in a school in Edinburgh. I am mindful that the past wee while has been a difficult time for the profession. It is really important that changes that result from the reviews are progressed in conjunction with the profession; I cannot foist change upon the profession.

I am mindful of Ms Duncan-Glancy’s point about rebranding. In Government, we need to recognise that the purpose behind the changes is to develop and deliver a more effective education system that better meets the needs of our learners and young people and prepares them for the world of work. I am absolutely committed to taking that forward, as cabinet secretary.