Chamber and committees

In view of the correspondence that we have had, that recommendation seems sound, and we support it.

Members indicated agreement.

In light of the evidence from the Scottish Government, are members content with the proposed course of action?

Members indicated agreement.

Our first new petition is PE2142, lodged by Andrew Stuart, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review the policy on school commencement and deferred school entry in Scotland and seek to reverse the potential harms that are caused by existing processes that have resulted in 19-month school year groups.

In additional written submissions, the petitioner details his personal experience. He also highlights the potential negative effects on children’s performance of the “relative age effect”—a phenomenon that has primarily been studied in sport—according to which the date of birth could be linked to the degree of success. In the petitioner’s view, some groups of children might be disadvantaged, as their parents are less likely to know about, or indeed to choose, the deferment option.

The SPICe briefing notes that, under the Education (Scotland) Act 1980, it is local authorities that determine a school commencement date. Although, in principle, local authorities have flexibility in when to set those dates, there seems to be a high level of consistency across Scotland. The act also stipulates that parents have a duty to ensure that their child receives education that is suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child. Parents can choose not to send their child to school if they are not five years old at the commencement date—in other words, they are able to defer entry.

In the Scottish Government’s response to the petition, the Minister for Children, Young People and the Promise defends the legal right of parents to defer entry as

“a longstanding feature of the Scottish education system”

and argues that it offers a choice to many parents who might feel that more time in an early years and childcare setting is more appropriate for their child’s needs. In the minister’s view, the quality of the teacher and the organisation of the class to meet a range of learning needs are more important in the success of children than the actual composition of classes. Furthermore, the curriculum for excellence framework gives teachers flexibility in how they choose to work with children of differing needs and abilities. The minister is open to revisit the issue in the future if evidence of significant harm to pupils were to emerge.

In the light of the minister’s fairly comprehensive response on this occasion, do colleagues have any suggestions as to what we might do?

I am encouraged to know that you are a high achiever, Mr Golden. I must say that my mother maintains that she thought she would have to get nappies in school colours for me, but that is another matter. Am I correct in saying that Mr Ewing and I attended the same primary school?

I hope that I am younger—no, I would not make any such claim. [Laughter.] I do not know whether they did nappies in school colours, Mr Ewing.

Thank you. Are colleagues content to support those proposals?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2143 was lodged by Sean Clerkin, who was the architect of another petition that we considered earlier. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation to require all private and registered social landlords to investigate and remediate damp and mould within specified timeframes and to high-quality standards. As the SPICe briefing on the petition reminds us, the problem of damp and mould has gained more public attention following the death in 2020 of two-year-old Awaab Ishak from a severe respiratory condition that was due to prolonged exposure to mould in his home. That led to the UK Government introducing Awaab’s law for England, which aims to put an obligation on social landlords to investigate and fix dangerous damp and mould within a set amount of time as well as to repair all emergency hazards within 24 hours.

In a written submission to the committee, the petitioner advocates for a Scottish version of Awaab’s law for social and private landlords. In addition to the requirement for a set timeframe for repairs, the petitioner believes that any statutory intervention must also specify that all work in relation to damp and mould has to be done to defined high standards and must focus on removing all mould from tenants’ homes.

In the Scottish Government’s response to the petition, the Minister for Housing indicates that one of the amendments that he has lodged to the Housing (Scotland) Bill, which is being considered by the Parliament, aims to transplant the provisions of Awaab’s law into Scottish legislation. The amendment would create a new power for the Scottish ministers to set out timescales for investigating and commencing repairs in the social rented sector. In the response, the Scottish Government also states its commitment to implementing Awaab’s law for private tenants, using existing powers, after engagement with housing professionals, private landlords and tenants across the private rented sector.

In support of the petition, the committee received a submission from our colleague Mark Griffin, who also advocates for replicating the provisions of Awaab’s law for social and private rented housing in Scotland. Mr Griffin indicates that he will work with the Government during the bill process and that he is keen to ensure that his proposals are reflected in amendments to the bill at stage 3. This is an important issue.

Yes. This is all fairly fresh, because the UK Government’s announcement was at the beginning of February and the Scottish Government’s announcement was in the middle of March. Given that the bill is going through the Parliament just now, we would, as suggested, want to see the provisions of the petition incorporated into the bill.

I think that we are all agreed. We will keep the petition open and we will progress on the basis that has been suggested. We thank Mr Clerkin for lodging the petition; it remains open, and we hope to advance its aims. Thank you for joining us in the gallery for the discussion of both your petitions, Mr Clerkin.

That brings us to the end of our formal business. We will next convene on Wednesday 18 June. We will now move into private session.