Chamber and committees

Welcome to the 17th meeting in 2025 of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee. I remind everyone to switch off or put to silent their mobile phones and other electronic devices.

The first item of business is a decision on whether to take in private items 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Is the committee content to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

The instrument seeks to minimise the potential disruption of services and ensure that passengers have continuity of service should operators seek to vary or cancel local services before a franchising framework can come into operation. In correspondence with the Scottish Government, which was published alongside the papers for this meeting, the committee queried an apparent minor drafting error in the instrument. In response, the Scottish Government confirmed that there is a minor drafting error in regulation 7(1), which it proposes to correct by correction slip.

In regulation 7(1), the reference to “paragraphs (2) to (4)” should be a reference to “paragraphs (2) and (3)”. Does the committee wish to draw the instrument to the attention of the Parliament on the general reporting ground?

Members indicated agreement.

Under agenda item 5, we are taking evidence from Siobhian Brown, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, on the Leases (Automatic Continuation etc) (Scotland) Bill. The minister is accompanied by Scottish Government officials Michael Paparakis, who is the policy and bill programme manager in the private law unit, and Lori Pidgeon, who is a solicitor in the constitutional and civil law division. I welcome you all to the meeting and invite the minister to make opening remarks.

I acknowledge that point about the additional sources of funding as well as the point that you raised, Ms Anderson. However, at the very beginning of this meeting, in response to the convener’s questioning, both the Scottish Government and COSLA said that they agreed with the recommendations in the briefing. With that on the record, I would expect local authority areas with a higher level of deprivation and more children with additional support needs to start to get additional resource to help them to deliver the services that are required to help those children and their families.

Paragraphs 46 to 55 and 59 and 60 of the briefing are interesting with regard to looking ahead and trying to deal with some of the challenges. As I said at the outset, I acknowledge that this area is hugely complex. Every child is different, so trying to do something that broad is very much a challenge.

The briefing mentions the situation with teacher training in ASL and the Scottish Government’s commitment to considering options in that regard. I am keen to understand where the Scottish Government is on the issue of additional training. We have heard that the number of pupil support assistants has increased to 17,046, and that additional training is very much required.

I will certainly be in touch with you, Laura, and I will speak to the convener of the cross-party group.

The deputy convener touched on the presumption in favour of mainstreaming. That issue has come up regularly in some of my work with parents. I undertook a survey, which was completed at the end of April. This is the first bit of information on the survey that I will put into the public domain, and I will get back to everyone who responded to it. We asked a question about the presumption of mainstreaming. A total of 29.49 per cent support it, while 70.51 per cent think that it is now past its sell-by date and want to do something different.

As the briefing indicates, there has been an increase of nearly 800 per cent in the number of ASL pupils since the 2004 act came into effect, and I have heard in various fora that the presumption of mainstreaming should be looked at again, potentially.

Has any work has been undertaken or has anything been looked at in that regard?

Okay. When I was on the Education, Children and Young People Committee, I was involved in the production of its previous report. I am also the deputy chair of the cross-party group on dyslexia and the chair of the cross-party group on visual impairment. Through that experience and through this piece of work, and in the engagement that I have had with parents, particularly in the past 12 months, I have reflected a great deal on young people who I went to school with and all the people who I have met in my community who were failed by the so-called “world-class” education system that Scotland had in the past.

Some of the strongest testimonies that I have heard are from people who have dyslexia. There has been a great deal of improvement in helping young people with dyslexia, but there are still challenges in certain areas. Some people still do not want to recognise that dyslexia is a thing and that it exists. I encourage the Scottish Government and COSLA, when undertaking the work that they are doing and when they engage with unions and others, to recognise that that aspect is hugely important. I have an example in my mind from just the past couple of years of somebody who had to move their child from one primary school to a different one because of the lack of acceptance of dyslexia.

Thank you.

That is very helpful. Colin Beattie cited East Lothian Council, which has a table setting out the range of reasons for additional support need provision. It would be helpful to have a consistent approach across the country, using that as an example. I am not saying that there is not a consistent approach, because I do not know whether that is the case. However, having a consistent approach to categorisation might assist with planning and considering different policies.

Earlier, Mr Rennick mentioned English as a second language in Glasgow. Clearly, that will not be an issue in other parts of the country. There will be spikes in needs, depending on the situation. However, a consistent approach to categorisation would certainly help with any future activity and planning.

My question is for Joanna Anderson. You mentioned £29 million, I think, and the further dialogue that would take place about the funding. However, at the start of the session, in response to the convener’s question about whether they agreed with the key recommendations of the briefing, both the Scottish Government and COSLA indicated that they agreed with those key recommendations.

To go over the point again, the first key recommendation notes that the proportion of pupils receiving ASL support in Scotland’s most deprived areas is almost double that in the least deprived areas. I do not understand why there has to be further dialogue on the distribution of money when the briefing is very clear and both the Scottish Government and COSLA have already agreed with its recommendations. I seek some clarification on that.