Chamber and committees

To go back to my question, do you see a future for foundation apprenticeships, and do you see them being of equal importance to modern apprenticeships and graduate apprenticeships? As you said, every bairn is different, so where do you see the future in that regard?

Okay—I will leave that for now.

During our evidence sessions, concerns have been raised about potential changes to the delivery of future student support, although SAAS and the SFC have stated that colleges will retain their role in distributing support. What assurances can you give that colleges will have an on-going role in that regard?

Some 38 per cent of Scotland’s population have a long-term health condition. How is the Scottish Government working to ensure that the outcomes of the long-term conditions framework consultation will build a framework that cuts across all conditions but recognises when it is important to be more condition specific?

What reassurance can the Government provide to land managers on the implementation of this legislation and on seeing that NatureScot works with land managers timeously to ensure that the legislation is workable and that the vital management tool of burning is accessible?

Does the cabinet secretary agree that there is also a role for other partners in workforce planning—universities, for example—to ensure that we have the right allocation of teachers across the board?

I want every child in Scotland to get the best possible start in life, and education is an affa big part of that best start. We have great schools and we have excellent teachers. We have a very good education system and we are committed to making it even better.

However, our education system faces challenges. The first of those is mentioned in the motion. We cannot commend our teachers enough for the work that they do day in, day out, but, as we have heard, we have shortages of teachers in key subjects, especially in the STEM subjects of science, technology, engineering and maths. I know from my constituency, in which the energy sector is a major employer, that you can never have too many folk going into those areas and that STEM graduates are highly sought after.

It is from that same pool of graduates that we need to encourage folk to move into teaching. There is a big risk that that becomes a spiral: if fewer STEM teachers means fewer people studying those subjects at school, fewer folk will study them at university and there will be fewer graduates to recruit teachers from.

The biggest risk to education is the immigration policies that are campaigned for by Nigel Farage and delivered by Keir Starmer. However, I am keen to focus my speech on solutions, investment and positivity. In this financial year, our SNP Government is investing more than £4.3 billion in Scotland’s education system. I give Willie Rennie and his Lib Dem colleagues their due: unlike some members, they voted for the budget that delivered that funding.

Councils are getting £186.5 million this year to support the recruitment and retention of teachers. There is £29 million of investment from the Scottish Government for additional support needs, which will include support for the recruitment and retention of the ASN workforce. There is more than £100 million to support modern and foundation apprenticeships.

The Scottish Government’s teaching bursary scheme provides bursaries of £20,000 for career changers who wish to undertake a one-year professional graduate diploma in education in hard-to-fill STEM subjects, and the preference waiver scheme lets probationer teachers receive up to £8,000 on top of their probationary salary. That could see teachers receiving a salary of more than £40,000 for their first year in teaching. That is on top of support through pupil equity funding and tuition being kept free in Scotland, with no up-front tuition fees and no backdoor tuition fees.

What does that funding, and the funding from years gone by, mean in practice? It means that the number of schoolteachers in post in Scotland has increased by 6 per cent since 2014. The poverty-related gap for young folk leaving school and going on to a positive destination has reduced by 60 per cent since 2009. The number of Scots from the most deprived backgrounds entering university on full-time first degree courses is now up by 37 per cent. Around 400,000 apprenticeship opportunities have been provided to young folk across Scotland since 2008. Scotland’s teachers continue to be the best paid in the UK and Scotland has the lowest pupil-to-teacher ratio in these islands. Scotland has the highest school spending per pupil across these islands.

The SNP has invested in Scotland’s future. We are ensuring that young folk in Scotland receive a top-quality education and that they can get the best possible start in life. Long may that continue.

I am delighted to take part in today’s debate on growing community-owned energy in Scotland—and to have the chance, once more, to talk up Aberdeen. With “Energy” in the title of today’s debate, let me start, as I do every time that happens, by reminding folk that Aberdeen, part of which I represent, is the energy capital of Europe and the future net zero capital of the world. More relevant to today’s debate, Aberdeen is home to Scotland’s first urban community hydro energy project, the very well named Donside hydro. The Donside hydro is owned by Aberdeen Community Energy, which was set up by the Donside community association with the aim of helping to make Donside village a sustainable community.

At this point, as the MSP for Aberdeen Donside, I feel it is important to note that the Donside hydro, the Donside community association and Donside village are all in the constituency of Aberdeen Central. It is really not confusing at all.

The Donside hydro does not just have a fantastic name; it won the Scottish green energy award in 2016 and it is Aberdeen’s first community energy scheme. Unfortunately, it is also currently our city’s only community generation project. That needs to change.

Scotland is an energy-rich country, and Aberdeen has been at the heart of it for half a century. Far too few folk are getting the benefits from that energy, however. Over 50 years, we have seen billions of pounds of oil and gas revenues make their way to Westminster and to private shareholders. In the energy capital of Europe, far too many of my constituents are living in fuel poverty, far too many are struggling to pay their energy bills and far too many are scared to put on the heating when it gets cold outside.

The move to net zero will give us a chance to do some things differently. It is not just about how we harness the energy, but about how the benefits from our doing so are shared. They must be shared in a way that benefits all and not just the few.

I have seen enough of how community energy projects can work in the north-east to know that we need to do more. In Donside—that is the bit in the constituency of Aberdeen Central—the Archimedes screw scheme generates clean renewable energy for homes and businesses. It is a scheme that shows how renewable energy is generated and supports education around that, and it produces a fund that supports local community initiatives.

Elsewhere in the north-east, in Alexander Burnett’s constituency of Aberdeenshire West, Huntly has taken a similar approach but with a wind turbine instead of a hydro project. It has used its proceeds, along with much funding, in an impressive way.

Those are both great examples of Scotland’s natural resources benefiting local communities. I want to see more benefit from our vast renewable resource for communities, consumers, the wider economy and, I hope, at some point soon, my constituents.

Before I comment on the amendments to the motion, I feel that it is important to recognise that every single amendment is an addendum and that there is a lot of common ground among members when it comes to community energy. I will now focus on some of the ground that we do not have in common.

Douglas Lumsden has previously made no secret of his position on pylons, but here is the thing: not that long ago, if you had said that Scotland would be able to export its wind and sell it to England, you would have gotten some very strange looks. We now have that opportunity—we just need to install the infrastructure. I fully accept that that infrastructure should support lower bills. People should see a more tangible link between pylons going up and their electricity bills coming down. Unfortunately, a lot of that comes down to the UK Government and to GB Energy.

That brings me to the Labour amendment. I will never say no to money being made available to communities in Scotland, but with billions of pounds being taken out of Scotland’s energy industry by the windfall tax, I am sure that the UK Government could afford to loosen the purse strings just a wee bit more.

Unfortunately, none of the technology that we have discussed today can harness energy from hot air, so I will draw my remarks to a close. We know that the future of energy is renewables, and community ownership puts renewable energy generation into the hands of folk and communities across Scotland. I will always support and fight for the idea of Scotland’s future being in Scotland’s hands, and I look forward to seeing more locally generated power benefiting communities across Scotland in years to come.

I am delighted to take part in today’s debate on growing community-owned energy in Scotland—and to have the chance, once more, to talk up Aberdeen. With “Energy” in the title of today’s debate, let me start, as I do every time that happens, by reminding folk that Aberdeen, part of which I represent, is the energy capital of Europe and the future net zero capital of the world. More relevant to today’s debate, Aberdeen is home to Scotland’s first urban community hydro energy project, the very well named Donside hydro. The Donside hydro is owned by Aberdeen Community Energy, which was set up by the Donside community association with the aim of helping to make Donside village a sustainable community.

At this point, as the MSP for Aberdeen Donside, I feel it is important to note that the Donside hydro, the Donside community association and Donside village are all in the constituency of Aberdeen Central. It is really not confusing at all.

The Donside hydro does not just have a fantastic name; it won the Scottish green energy award in 2016 and it is Aberdeen’s first community energy scheme. Unfortunately, it is also currently our city’s only community generation project. That needs to change.

Scotland is an energy-rich country, and Aberdeen has been at the heart of it for half a century. Far too few folk are getting the benefits from that energy, however. Over 50 years, we have seen billions of pounds of oil and gas revenues make their way to Westminster and to private shareholders. In the energy capital of Europe, far too many of my constituents are living in fuel poverty, far too many are struggling to pay their energy bills and far too many are scared to put on the heating when it gets cold outside.

The move to net zero will give us a chance to do some things differently. It is not just about how we harness the energy, but about how the benefits from our doing so are shared. They must be shared in a way that benefits all and not just the few.

I have seen enough of how community energy projects can work in the north-east to know that we need to do more. In Donside—that is the bit in the constituency of Aberdeen Central—the Archimedes screw scheme generates clean renewable energy for homes and businesses. It is a scheme that shows how renewable energy is generated and supports education around that, and it produces a fund that supports local community initiatives.

Elsewhere in the north-east, in Alexander Burnett’s constituency of Aberdeenshire West, Huntly has taken a similar approach but with a wind turbine instead of a hydro project. It has used its proceeds, along with much funding, in an impressive way.

Those are both great examples of Scotland’s natural resources benefiting local communities. I want to see more benefit from our vast renewable resource for communities, consumers, the wider economy and, I hope, at some point soon, my constituents.

Before I comment on the amendments to the motion, I feel that it is important to recognise that every single amendment is an addendum and that there is a lot of common ground among members when it comes to community energy. I will now focus on some of the ground that we do not have in common.

Douglas Lumsden has previously made no secret of his position on pylons, but here is the thing: not that long ago, if you had said that Scotland would be able to export its wind and sell it to England, you would have gotten some very strange looks. We now have that opportunity—we just need to install the infrastructure. I fully accept that that infrastructure should support lower bills. People should see a more tangible link between pylons going up and their electricity bills coming down. Unfortunately, a lot of that comes down to the UK Government and to GB Energy.

That brings me to the Labour amendment. I will never say no to money being made available to communities in Scotland, but with billions of pounds being taken out of Scotland’s energy industry by the windfall tax, I am sure that the UK Government could afford to loosen the purse strings just a wee bit more.

Unfortunately, none of the technology that we have discussed today can harness energy from hot air, so I will draw my remarks to a close. We know that the future of energy is renewables, and community ownership puts renewable energy generation into the hands of folk and communities across Scotland. I will always support and fight for the idea of Scotland’s future being in Scotland’s hands, and I look forward to seeing more locally generated power benefiting communities across Scotland in years to come.

Will the minister give way?