Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 19 October 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 882 contributions

|

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

Can we get hold of that review paper? That would be really interesting.

I realise that we have not yet heard from Craig Naylor, but John Ireland and Julie Paterson have spoken about the importance of independence, which is something that all the SPCB-supported bodies have emphasised to us. However, to flip that on its head, one of the frustrations that the committee is hearing from SPCB-supported bodies involves a perceived inability to effect change. They produce brilliant papers, research and investigations, but that work does not go anywhere. Although they are accountable to the Parliament, committees or members are not picking up that work and feeding it into the Government. I wonder whether being sponsored by the Government and having direct access to a minister means that the work that you do is taken up and fed into the system more effectively than it would be if you were that further step removed from the Parliament.

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

That is helpful.

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

I will return to the point around funding. John Ireland spoke a little about that at the start of the meeting, but I want to dig into it a bit more.

We are interested in how funding arrangements are different for SPCB-supported bodies versus Scottish Government bodies. Will you give us a bit more detail about how your budgets are set? Do you set your budget and then it gets signed off by someone? What is the process?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

Do you get pushback on your budget or is the process of approving the budget largely technical?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

Is there pushback on the budgets that you set, or is the process generally a technical one?

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee [Draft]

SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review

Meeting date: 1 May 2025

Lorna Slater

I will dig in for further details. Do you come under pressure to make efficiency savings, or do you have support to find them and to optimise your budget? Is there a push to do those things? If additional work comes up or an urgent crisis happens, is there a process for applying for more money?

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Lorna Slater

Does anyone else want to come in on that?

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Lorna Slater

I hear that Jack Norquoy is looking for projects managers, so I will pop my CV through.

We have been hearing from employers about their frustration with the inflexibility in Scotland’s skills system, particularly in colleges, because college courses are offered only at certain times of the year and colleges cannot keep up with technology. Lothian Buses, for example, uses private training providers because the colleges do not have hydrogen buses for the apprentices to practise on. How can we make our college and university sectors flexible enough to provide the workforce that we desperately need?

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Lorna Slater

Who funds those? Who pays the student’s wages?

Economy and Fair Work Committee [Draft]

Skills Delivery

Meeting date: 30 April 2025

Lorna Slater

I am interested in the theme of workplace learning. I am continually surprised and slightly horrified by how far the UK is behind North America on things such co-oping in engineering programmes. I do not know how familiar you are with such things. When I studied engineering at my university—and this was common in universities all over North America—my degree took five years, but it took me seven years to graduate because, for two and half of those years, I worked in industry, paid by industry, and not at the minimum wage but at junior engineering rates. When I graduated, not only had that had some impact on my student loans, but I had two and half years of experience, and I was offered two jobs in my first week in the UK.

The model in North America is that universities partner with industry, which knows that the model exists and gets engineering students for a chunk of time—four months, eight months or a year—so that those students are able to complete an entire project. It is quite common for engineering companies to say, “Brilliant. We need a new thing, so we’ll get some co-op students in the summer to deliver that project for us.” It is a long-term partnership, and it means that we do not have the juggling act of graduate apprentices being here for three days a week and there for three days a week, which makes it difficult to fund lectures and difficult for students to plan their lives and their transport to work—all those ordinary logistics.

In terms of flexibility for institutions, is the North American model being looked at? Should it be, or is it not right for the UK? How do we make the workplace learning better here?