Chamber and committees

Yes, absolutely. You have directed the question at me—and understandably so, because I made the point—but I might ask the team to say a little bit about the data that we already have and how we are trying to develop that. There have been calls for a longitudinal study through a young person’s life, as you have described it, and we are considering that.

Coming back to the everything, everywhere point, I think that we have to take ownership of a balance in that respect—that is, between focusing our energy and our efforts on turning the tank around on how all of this is done in society just now or carrying out longer-term pieces of work like the longitudinal data collection and study. Both are important approaches, but we do have to make decisions about what we want to prioritise now with regard to change.

I just want to make a point about data sharing. Whether it is the First Minister’s ambition to eradicate child poverty, my ambition to improve school attainment or our ambition to keep the Promise, the fact is that data sharing across Scotland is a problem. It is a problem between organisations—and not for want of their trying, in many circumstances. However, there is a nervousness about it, or a lack of clarity about how to navigate the general data protection regulation and other things, and we are working really hard to try to break that down. In that respect, I would highlight the excellent example of the new agreements that have been created between Glasgow City Council and the Department for Work and Pensions. You would think it just common sense to share that data to inform what the council is doing, but we have had to overcome what is quite a substantial issue in that respect, and it exists across the board.

We are trying to break down that sort of thing, and public service reform presents us with a really good opportunity to do so, because it allows us to look, in this moment, at the way in which services are delivered—in this case, around children who require support and their families—and ask how we would optimise that, if we were starting again, and who we would require to co-locate or share information or to take decisions together. We are working on all of that just now.

10:15

Regardless of what else could go around it and how regional authorities would be required to co-operate with one another, I think that having a much larger area that follows one approach would be helpful for many people who are looking for permanent positions.

Thank you—I agree with your assessment; the competition with industry is absolutely real, and we should think about how to draw on industry to support the workforce.

On the political point, I would reflect that many teachers whom I meet at the round-table events that I regularly hold tell me that it is demoralising to see the way in which their profession is often described in the media. We know that that is not unique to education—bad news sells, and we are experiencing quite a lot of that just now. Nevertheless, as you will know from your experience, and as I know from the time that I have spent with stakeholders in this area, teachers are passionate and positive. They are certainly under pressure and are looking to their Government and their local authority to support them with that, but they are deeply passionate about doing the best for young people.

We have a responsibility to create the right conditions. You mentioned pay; that is something the Scottish Government has been keen to support. Not only is it right to recognise the professionalism of our teaching workforce, but it helps to bring people into the profession. RCCT is one example of that, and there are others. Teaching is a wonderful profession—the people who commit themselves to it are doing an excellent thing, and I want to see them supported.

The only thing that I will add to that point is that we recognise that, as we shift the balance of care to families, kinship has always been important and is ever more important in all the areas that Ms Brown spoke about. We introduced the Scottish recommended allowance, which will rise with inflation, as ensured by the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Act 2026. That is another piece of practical support.

I am giving close consideration to the issue of additional support for learning and the exceptional workforce that supports it. I understand why, when we consider spend that is dedicated to RCCT, people are asking, “What else might you have spent that on within education?” However, we need to invest across the board.

In this year’s budget, for example, an additional £29 million was dedicated to additional support for learning: £28 million went to councils, and £1 million was used by Education Scotland to create training tools to support the workforce who are involved in that work. I do not see it as a trade-off. We have to try to do both things, albeit with limited funds.

I will give you one example of how the two issues come together. I talked earlier about how having more professional time will allow the class teacher a more tailored approach to the additional support needs that they face in the class. They report to us that, sometimes, they feel that they cannot do the best for those young people because they do not have the time to prepare to teach them well.

There is another wee example that might be of interest to the committee. We are not just pursuing RCCT but developing digital tools for support. I draw your attention to one that is being developed, which is called Trellis. It relates to support for children with additional support needs. Often, teachers have to convene meetings with learners and their families to create a child plan. Teachers have reported that the work to take the notes of such a meeting and turn them into information that can feed into a plan can take two or three hours, and that they often have to do that outwith allocated time. The tool will help them to gather all the information that was discussed and put it into a format that is more workable—taking away that two or three hours and creating something that is ready to go. That allows better communication with families, more quickly.

I appreciate that you will have particular insights into this, given the interest that you have declared, and I would extend that to other committee members who might have views, as I consider the bill and what needs to be done.

We could legislate for a requirement to recognise the value of culture or to provide it in a certain way locally, but in advance of that I can also use the multi-annual funding and the increases in funding to provide support for organisations across the country, with a large geographical spread. That is practical support that can be given now, in advance of any legislation being changed.

That said, I am conscious that local authorities feel under pressure when it comes to their cultural assets and the provision of culture. With regard to public sector reform in local government, the PFG, as you will see, talks about a three-month period of intensive dialogue on its future; that has to offer an opportunity in the culture space to work better across boundaries, share resources better and enhance the cultural offering across Scotland. However, I do not have any predetermined view on how we do that.

I am open minded on that. Our commitment deliberately does not say that a bill will be passed in this session. What is important to me is to ensure that the quality and the necessity of what comes forward will be in it, among all our other priorities in this session. As I say, I am collecting ideas. I have a preference for moving ahead with things that we can do now but, where a piece of primary legislation is absolutely required, we will be able to develop that as well. I cannot say for sure whether that bill will be passed in this session. It will depend on content and timing.

Yes—absolutely. Again, there are a few important points in there.

On expenditure, those decisions are for Creative Scotland and I do not take day-to-day involvement in them. However, as far as I am concerned, there is no reason why one area should have no investment. I talked about my desire to see geographical spread. To the extent that you have not already raised that with Creative Scotland, I will ask it about that.

On the BBC and screen infrastructure, I regret “River City” being cancelled, exactly for the reasons that you set out. I have listened to some of the actors who were involved in it talking about how much development went on across all the skills that are required, including acting, producing, costume and writing, and how that transformed things in Scotland over the period for which the programme ran. Therefore, I do not think that it should have gone.

11:30

Happily, however, we have other productions that are based in Scotland and that are garnering that talent. If we think about “Outlander” and “Dept Q”, which has just got a second season, as well as “An t-Eilean”, the Gaelic drama, we can see that we are starting to build that presence. That is positive, and I want it to grow. However, the BBC has a responsibility to commission programming so that people in Scotland can turn on their TV or radio and see and hear content that reflects their lives, so I will certainly put that case to the BBC.

The individuals and groups who care deeply about the CCA are well organised and are doing a good job of making clear their views. As cabinet secretary, I am listening, and I expect Creative Scotland to do so as well.

That is right, and it underlines a point that the Government is forthright about: PSR is about outcomes for people in Scotland. It is about improving outcomes and reducing complexity, and making good things happen faster for people in Scotland. You are right that the Screen Scotland change is an example—as I said to Ms Beresford—of renewal rather than reduction.