Chamber and committees

I am keen to understand whether the cabinet secretary has thought about how that might happen. She will know, through her time as cabinet secretary and her career, that the experiences and outcomes in religious education in Roman Catholic schools are different and distinct. Will she talk about the connection between observing your faith and learning about it in the context of the world and other faiths? I am keen to understand what work she has done or is planning to do on that.

I thank colleagues for their amendments in this group and for allowing us to have a wider debate about the scope of withdrawal rights and whether those should apply to religious education.

No issue in the bill better represents the complexity of the issues that have been brought up in the process. It is frustrating that we are having this debate at stage 2 and at a point where we have only three months of legislative time left in this session of Parliament given that it would have been preferable to work through the details more broadly.

I recognise, as I am sure many colleagues do, the frustration felt by many religious, moral and philosophical studies teachers at the idea that their discipline is somehow unique and that it is acceptable for a pupil to be withdrawn from that academic subject when that cannot happen with other subjects that are taught in school. Those teachers are subject professionals and are educating our children and young people with vital knowledge about religions and belief systems and about the encounters that those young people will have with those systems in the wider world, while equipping them with the skills to interrogate different moral and belief systems.

All of that is true in non-denominational school settings, but my significant concern is that the amendments do not seem to take cognisance of the different religious education that is offered in denominational settings. In Scotland, we find that predominantly in the Roman Catholic sector, although we find it in the Jewish and Episcopalian sectors as well.

I do not want to detain the committee too much by speaking to all the amendments in the group, but I want to speak briefly to the general issues that are raised by amendments 31 to 33 and others in the group on the operability of the changes that are proposed in the bill and how they might work in practice.

Thus far, the Scottish Government has not provided sufficient clarity on how the process of a pupil objection to withdrawal should be handled by schools in practice. Particularly given the risk of creating intra-family conflict and tension between pupils and parents who perhaps have distinct views on whether to participate in religious observance or education, the bill will put schools and teachers in the middle of that conflict.

That is fair. I infer from what you have said that there will be on-going work, even at that informal level, with consultees. That is welcome, and I am sure that this committee will want to reflect that in its legacy reporting.

I will move on to talk about compliance with the 2015 act. We know, from the evidence that we heard, that 62 per cent of listed authorities comply with statutory duties, with regard to BSL translations and their authority plans. What steps is the Government intending to take to improve compliance, which, at 62 per cent, is obviously not where we want it to be?

Good morning, Deputy First Minister. I have rejoined the committee at the concluding stage of this piece of work but was present for previous evidence sessions. In that evidence, we heard many views about the parity of esteem that BSL will be held in alongside Scotland’s other languages. Of course, nobody would want to set languages against one another. It is important that we recognise their richness and support them all.

However, we heard a lot of asks for there to be an oversight body for BSL, similar to Bòrd na Gàidhlig, which has an important role in supporting the Gaelic language as well as being able to speak a bit of truth to power and very often compel, if that is the right word, local authorities and others to deliver on Gaelic. You and I spoke about that issue in a previous evidence session, but has your thinking evolved with regard to whether it might be worth considering establishing a national body for BSL?

That is welcome to hear, and I am sure that your position will be welcomed by those in the BSL community who gave evidence. I wonder about timing and the likelihood of action being taken, given that we are in a challenging timeframe, with the end of the parliamentary session approaching. What are the Government’s thoughts with regard to starting work on the recommendations before the election and then ensuring that there is a legacy piece? Do you have a view on how that might take shape? Would there be a consultation? I appreciate that it is hard to say, but I think that people will want a bit more detail on what the commitment is.

That is quite comprehensive and I am conscious of time, so I will hand back to you, convener.

Good morning. My questions will focus on the content of the annual report in terms of the funding and finance of SCoSS. From the 2023-24 annual report, we saw that expenditure would exceed the budget in 2024-25. That was not a huge overspend—it was £470,000 compared to the projected spend of £450,000. The committee is interested to know whether that has been resolved and whether there is a view about the financial sustainability of SCoSS going forward?

Do you feel that you are now in a position where the budget planning process will be easier because—to borrow a phrase—known unknowns are perhaps lessened by where we are in the process of transfer? Are you finding that the engagement with the Government on your needs—saying, “Here is a need. How do we get to the budget figure that will work for us?”—is a communicative and open process?

It sounds as though, given the timing, with more and more people either accessing new benefits or being transferred to benefits, it is probably quite crucial that the lived experience piece is at the forefront of what you are doing.