Chamber and committees

Audit Scotland acknowledged that the pressures have been exacerbated by inflation, rising costs and so on, so I am glad that that has been mentioned.

Many years ago, prior to regionalisation—was it in 2014?—the Office for National Statistics announced that colleges throughout the United Kingdom were to be considered to be public bodies, which meant that they would get central Government funding. I am aware that you cannot build up reserves, but I have read that there is scope for setting up arm’s-length organisations in order that you could generate funding. I am interested to hear a little bit more about that, and maybe to hear of an example of where that has happened.

I went for the subject of college finances with the previous panel, but a lot of that has been covered.

My observation, which you will not be surprised to hear, is that I have some sympathy with your position. You are having to work within a finite budget that is being impacted by the cost of living and inflation, and you cannot borrow; I know that that is a tricky situation to be in.

Hugh Hall talked about the Office for National Statistics, which has reclassified colleges as public bodies. I assume that being public bodies increases accountability for colleges. I am looking for solutions as we move forward. If you were to vary the business and funding model, how would you balance the need for accountability with enabling colleges to have a little bit of extra space to self-fund?

I want to ask quickly about the impact of multiyear funding. Would Joanna Campbell like to come in on that?

At times of great loss, we are gifted an elusive opportunity to stop, take a moment and allow ourselves some space for introspection. The passing of Her Majesty the Queen has been deeply felt throughout the nation, and I join my colleagues across the chamber in expressing my sincere condolences to His Majesty the King and his family throughout this time of mourning.

When Jane Austen passed away in 1817, her brother James wrote her epitaph, which, carved in stone in Winchester cathedral, reads:

“Their grief is in proportion to their affection; they know their loss to be irreparable”.

In the days following the announcement of Queen Elizabeth’s death on 8 September, the genuine fondness felt by so many has been amplified by countless tributes, tales and warm anecdotes from people who had met her or who simply felt connected to her, as well as by more solemn moments of silence and reflection.

Although I never had the chance to meet Her Majesty, I know that we shared an appreciation for a much-cherished building in my constituency—Glasgow’s Kelvingrove art gallery and museum. Housed in immense walls of ornate red sandstone that date from 1901 lies one of Europe’s great art collections and an important landmark in the city that I call home. Following a three-year restoration project, the gallery was reopened in July 2006 by Queen Elizabeth II, who expressed her delight to be involved and her admiration for what she considered a great institution.

Today, we recognise a remarkable and historic moment and have bid farewell to the longest-reigning monarch the UK has ever seen. As I am sure that many of my colleagues do, too, I remember the Queen’s silver jubilee in 1977. I was in primary school in England and my school organised a jubilee party with fancy dress. The theme was countries of the Commonwealth.

The bunting was out, the silver coins were to be given to each child and we all hurried excitedly to school in our costumes. My friend was dressed, confusingly, in what appeared to be some kind of Dutch ensemble. Eyebrows were certainly raised, given that the Netherlands was not part of the Commonwealth, but you try explaining that to a very enthusiastic nine-year-old. It was the only costume in the cupboard and she was not missing the opportunity to wear it.

The Queen was, indeed, a consistent presence for many decades, bringing comfort to many and dedicating her life to public service. I end with words from her Christmas broadcast in 2002. Addressing the nation, Her Majesty reminded us, in her stoic fashion:

“Our modern world places such heavy demands on our time and attention that the need to remember our responsibilities to others is greater than ever.”

I will move things forward a wee bit and look at outcomes. I will start off with a positive point. On results day, an open letter from a range of Scotland’s employer representative groups and others was published. They said:

“We want to reassure you that we recognise and value your qualifications as much as any other year and that the skills you have developed, and will continue to develop, will play a crucial role in ensuring a bright future for businesses in Scotland and our economy.”

I am sure that our youngsters were very heartened to hear that.

However, we are acutely aware of the changing needs of the employment sector—I am talking about not just business but social care and the public sector. We know that there is changing need and that some jobs do not yet exist, which is a challenge with regard to the skills, knowledge, attitudes and behaviours that are required. How does the SQA work with employers and further and higher education providers to ensure that the qualifications support candidates—our young people—to the next stage of their learning journey?

Is the SQA flexible enough? I am interested in the future. Obviously, skills and demands are changing, and I hear from employers that crafting a new diet will also require assessment at a robust level that is recognised. Is the SQA flexible and robust enough to be able to respond to that need?

What about the timescales? We know that there are skills shortages. It would be good to know how long it can take to develop a qualification and assess it before people start coming through.

Thank you.

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will confirm when actions to remove cladding from properties identified as dangerous under the single building assessment programme will be completed. (S6O-01324)

My constituents in Glasgow Kelvin can be reassured that those projects have continued at pace.

When announcing the Scottish safer buildings accord in May, the cabinet secretary underlined that a joint and collaborative approach was key to resolving the issue of unsafe cladding. Could she provide an update on how the accord has been received by partners across the sector?

First, I offer a warm welcome to the visitors in the public gallery. They include many individuals and representatives of organisations, including colleagues from Running Out Racism, Show Racism the Red Card, Active Life Club and the Scottish Trades Union Congress, among others, that work tirelessly to eradicate racism in all its forms, including in sport. I acknowledge the overwhelming cross-party support for the motion—we are all grateful for that.

This is an uncomfortable topic. Recognising the existence of institutional racism is to admit to years of apathy as people suffered around us, and to accept that processes and structures that were designed without all voices present have caused harm and affected the achievements of so many people. If there is one clear message that we should take away from the debate, it is that we need to get comfortable with being uncomfortable, for it is in that discomfort that true change can take place.

Today, we reflect on the findings of “Changing the Boundaries: The Plan4Sport Independent Review into Racism in Scottish Cricket”. I commend sportscotland for commissioning the review. It is never easy for anyone to come forward, and those who do often suffer negative impacts on their career, family or mental health. However, it is because of people’s bravery that we now have a chance to reflect and move forward in the true spirit of sporting endeavour. Maya Angelou said:

“when you know better, do better.”

This is our chance to do better.

Woven throughout the damning report of the review are themes of an absence of leadership, a lack of accountability and transparency and an overall loss of confidence in the incident report handling processes. Four hundred and forty-eight examples of institutional racism were identified against the national governing body, Cricket Scotland.

Sir William Macpherson, in his 1999 report of the public inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence, defined institutional racism as

“The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin”.

That is the definition that is referred to by the authors of the review. From participants, we heard that there were “too many close friendships” in Cricket Scotland for confidentiality requirements to be upheld. We heard that people who had previously raised concerns were victimised as a result and that the familiar old adage of, “It’s just banter,” was invoked as a means of silencing those who spoke out. At board level, there was no overall vision or strategy for tackling racism and there was a total lack of diversity in workforce and governance structures.

Although the findings of the report are certainly alarming, it is vital that we not only consider the consequences of our inertia but seize this opportunity to learn. I am grateful to Aneela McKenna, an experienced diversity officer, for informing my thoughts on the subject.

I acknowledge the examples of excellent practice that are clearly evident, especially at grass-roots club and association level. We can learn from the good and, with a collective will and responsibility, we can improve across all sporting disciplines, not just in cricket.

As a starting point, the review includes many practical and deliverable recommendations. I acknowledge the work that is already under way by sportscotland and urge it to proceed in partnership with organisations that have expertise and experience to offer. That may well help to rebuild trust and confidence. I welcome Cricket Scotland’s commitment to have a new board in place by the end of this month.

Let us be clear: racism exists everywhere in society. What makes an organisation institutionally racist is not that it has racism. The issue is whether an organisation prioritises tackling racism and being actively anti-racist in its policies, procedures and culture, or remains passive and content with a never-ending cycle of deny, defend and deflect, on repeat. Even if we never truly understand the experiences of others, it is important to strive to be an ally. Paul Reddish OBE, who is here today, talks of allyship as

“standing up for those when they are not in the room and handing the microphone back when they are present”.

I am minded of the words of Nelson Mandela, who said:

“Sport has the power to the change the world. It has the power to inspire. It has the power to unite people in a way that little else does.”

In allyship, we must strive to share the pitches, the tracks and the boardrooms as equals.

Looking forward, there is a need for on-going proactive oversight and scrutiny of sporting bodies and organisations, and to include critical expert voices in the process. One option may be to link into the Government’s on-going work on a national anti-racist infrastructure, led by Dr Ima Jackson. A key recommendation of that work is to establish a more effective accountability and governance infrastructure in Scotland. The terms of reference state:

“Too often recommendations have been made on racism and minority ethnic ‘issues’ that have subsequently been forgotten and not implemented. They may then be raised again by other groups without reference to what has been asked before. This absence of institutional memory within the current system and structures is frustrating, disempowering and can be understood as a mechanism by which systemic discrimination occurs.”

I believe that governance structures and polices that adhere to and deliver on the Macpherson definition of institutional racism should become a statutory obligation for bodies in receipt of government funding. That should be able to be applied robustly across different groups, with support from the national agency, while recognising the varying size and demographics of sporting bodies.

Let us ensure that another generation do not suffer from racism, with nowhere to go and no hope of redress or apology, but are instead embraced by the sport that they love. We must rebuild trust among our sportsmen and women of colour and ensure that we are not discussing the same issues yet again in the next parliamentary session.

I would like to thank Qasim Sheikh and Majid Haq for their enormous bravery, and I note that Majid is in the gallery today. However, we cannot continue to rely on the bravery of individuals to raise these issues.

There is momentum for positive change. Scotland has given us great sporting successes. Imagine the increased scope of that success if the potential of all of Scotland’s sportspeople was set free from the shackles of discrimination. This is truly a leadership moment. I urge everyone, including those in authority, from Government to sportscotland to clubs and associations, to embrace the facts—uncomfortable though they may be and might make us—and deliver the necessary policies to change them.

I will finish with the words of James Baldwin, who said:

“Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.”

[Applause.]