Chamber and committees

My apologies.

We expect to see progress on that. We still have the absolute determination to fulfil the Government commitment to have 3,500 additional teachers and 500 additional support staff by the end of the parliamentary session.

As I said to Graeme Dey, discussions with COSLA are coming up in which I will be discussing, in particular, that £145.5 million and what we can expect to be delivered.

I expect to see progress now. I will not put a figure on that today, because what we have attempted to do in the past is ensure that we have an agreement with COSLA on those aspects. Clearly, that did not work last year, but I want to try to work with COSLA. We are pushing each other to see how far we can go. I am happy to come back on that once the discussions with COSLA have happened. The local authorities are the recruiters. I could sit here and name a figure. We tried to do that last year, but, with the best will in the world, those who recruited the teachers did not fulfil the agreement that we had. Therefore, I think that it would be more useful to the committee if we came back after we have had discussions with COSLA and have looked to find a shared understanding about where we might get to.

To come back on the first point, there has been no change. We have always said that we would wish to close the attainment gap with substantial elimination by 2026, so that was the policy and it remains the policy.

I referenced the NIF because you have rightly said in the past that we have focused on some measures but not mentioned others.Therefore, I would point to the numbers that are in the NIF and where we would want to see those.

Will we get to a point where it is utterly eliminated, where I look at what has happened in the NIF and there is zero on all those measures? In reality, in an education system, I think that it would be exceptionally difficult, if not impossible, to get to the point of zero. However, we are looking to substantially eliminate that gap and get it down as close to zero as possible. That may vary from measure to measure, because they are measuring very different aspects.

If you will forgive me, I will not be drawn on what that number is, but I think that there are 11 old measures in the NIF, and we have included some more, so the number will vary from measure to measure. However, we are now seeing progress and recovery. We are not at the point of substantial elimination but, for example, if the stretch aims for primary schools were delivered and progress continued—that is an “if”, because stretch aims are supposed to be exceptionally challenging—there would be a substantial elimination of the poverty-related attainment gap in primary schools by 2026. I hope that that gives an example of a trajectory for that happening in primary schools, but I appreciate that the trajectory in other areas is more challenging.

I point to the section at the end of my introductory remarks. If Mr Kerr is suggesting that we have not increased the budget by enough, he should please feel free to suggest how much it should be increased by and where that money should come from. We are in difficult financial circumstances and, within Government, we have seen a real recognition of that and of our ability to increase the colleges budget. If you do not feel that it is sufficient, Mr Kerr, I would be more than happy to know how much you think it should increase by—

—as you always are. I will certainly ensure that Mr Hepburn keeps the committee updated on the collection of data as we move forward.

Despite the way that it is often portrayed, a great deal of success is happening in Scottish education. When we look at the number of qualifications received at the last results day, we see near-record highs, and the number of young people going to positive destinations when they leave school is also at a near-record high. I think that it would be a grave misinterpretation to say that there is not success within the education system, because the number of young people who are going to positive destinations suggests that there is.

Again, I would push back on the suggestion that the OECD said that Scottish education is in crisis, because that is not what its report said, and that is not what the International Council of Education Advisors said, either.

There is a lot to commend in Scottish education. One of the aspects that came from the international council when I discussed the matter with it was that we should look to reform but that we should also look at continuous improvement. That means looking at how we challenge ourselves to learn the lessons of what happened during Covid and at how we challenge ourselves to move to the next level. It does not mean getting to a point at which we are in a reform process that throws out what already happens in Scottish education. A lot of good happens in education.

I do not accept the premise of the question that the reform process was built in because we were in crisis, because I do not recognise that in the recommendations of the OECD or in the work from the international council. They did say that we can improve, but I do not think that there is any education system in Europe or elsewhere that should not challenge itself to improve. That is what the reform process is about. Scottish education is in good shape—as the information on exam results and positive destinations shows—but are there ways that we can improve our system? Of course, there are. That is why the reform process was brought in.

There are a number of areas in which Colleges Scotland has made proposals for the financial year that we are in and moving forward. Between the Government and the SFC, which allocates the expenditure, we are looking to ensure that there are increased flexibilities around the budget, such as not being as direct about how the budgets are spent to the same proportion. It is about how colleges can get a little bit of flexibility. That is not in relation to the entire budget but around a pretty substantial proportion of it.

I genuinely think that Colleges Scotland and the Government have been working well together to look at the flexibilities. We are very open to that. Mr Hepburn and I have had a number of conversations with Colleges Scotland, and officials frequently have similar conversations, as does the SFC. It is one of those areas in which we can assist colleges and give them the flexibility to deliver in a really tight financial situation. I do not think that there is any difference of opinion between the Government, the SFC and Colleges Scotland about the need for that, and we are all keen to move forward with that.

I do not recognise that figure, but we have an important piece of work going on—yes, within the SQA and Education Scotland—and there is also further funding for the reform package in Government to allow us to carry out that reform. When it comes to the money for the SQA and Education Scotland, clearly, they must still carry out the tasks and functions that they have as we go through that process.