Chamber and committees

Yes, I am happy to.

I start by thanking the Parliament’s legislative team for its support—to be quite honest, the team could also do with some more apprentices, given the amount of legislation that is going through Parliament. I also pay tribute to and thank our stakeholders, who have provided a lot of support during the passage of the bill on its way to stage 3.

Throughout the passage of the bill, Scottish Conservatives have worked to strengthen and embed the voice of industry in the development of Scotland’s skills strategy and the development of qualifications for apprenticeships.

In line with that approach, my amendment 75 would maintain

“an independent industry-led board to lead the oversight of the design, development, approval and delivery processes of Scottish apprenticeships”.

That is important, and we tried to safeguard and progress that at stage 2.

I welcome Willie Rennie’s amendment, which we will discuss later, to create a sub-committee of the apprenticeship committee, but, alongside many industry leaders, I continue to have concerns that the bill as it stands—and the changes that it will bring to the apprenticeship delivery environment in Scotland—could see the voice of industry in developing apprenticeships lost in translation.

An Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report from 2024 advocates for a statutory framework for employer involvement in apprenticeships, citing a range of international best practice in that regard. It specifically recommends establishing that statutory framework for employers in order to enable them to retain authority with regard to overseeing apprenticeship delivery and developing and approving frameworks, and to ensure that there is a legal obligation for them to be consulted with regard to commissioning decisions. I believe that that should be the approach in Scotland.

I also welcome amendment 11, in the name of my colleague Stephen Kerr.

I move amendment 75.

I thank the many organisations and businesses that have provided helpful briefings ahead of the stage 3 debate, and I also thank them for their work at stage 2. There has been concern out there about the potential impact of the bill on those organisations and businesses, and it has been clear, from speaking to them, that assurances have not been forthcoming.

However, I welcome the constructive way in which the minister has engaged since his appointment, when he inherited the bill from Graeme Dey. I also welcome the Government’s acceptance of amendments at stage 2, and its engagement with a number of amendments that I lodged at stage 2 and which ministers have taken forward at stage 3.

As I stated during the stage 1 debate,

“When Scottish ministers introduced the bill, we on the Conservative benches were open to the reasons and rationale behind it.”—[Official Report, 25 September 2025; c 71.]

However, as we have looked at the bill, it has become clear that it is not going to deliver what ministers suggest that it will.

It is worth reflecting on why the Scottish Government decided to legislate in this area. The independent review of the skills delivery landscape by James Withers in 2023 highlighted the need to focus on a new vision that meets the challenges of future needs. Principally, it looked towards the need to deliver flexibility across post-school learning systems in order to achieve genuine agility and to ensure that learners at all stages of their lives, across Scotland, have the opportunity to gain skills and take up potential apprenticeship opportunities.

I am sorry to say that the reality is that the bill does not reflect real delivery of the Withers’ report. From the outset, we have challenged ministers to go further and for the bill to be more radical. As Russell Findlay outlined two weeks ago, the Scottish Conservatives want to see economic growth at the heart of every Scottish Government decision, with a Government that is always on the side of the entrepreneur and the innovator and that is ambitious and aspirational for the small businesses that make our country tick.

We want our apprenticeship system to be more responsive and agile. That is what we have been working to try to achieve. The Scottish Conservatives want to see an apprenticeship system that works with businesses to deliver more apprenticeship places. Crucially, we want to address, rather than simply discuss, the huge skills shortages in the sectors that we hear about week in and week out.

That is why we wanted the bill to go further to empower sectors to create more opportunities and focus on a demand-led approach. We wanted a bill that would help to provide training and retraining opportunities in Scottish firms, which would be at the heart of shaping skills development, as well as the courses that will be crucial for a host of sectors if we are to realise the potential of many growth areas in our economy. The Scottish Conservatives wanted the bill to do more than simply change how apprenticeships are administered in Scotland. We hoped that it would be an opportunity to seriously address the growing skills shortages and gaps that exist across so many of our key sectors, which are vital for the future of our economy and this country’s prosperity.

I turn to the concerns that were raised during the Education, Children and Young People Committee’s scrutiny of the bill. We on the Conservative benches continue to have serious concerns about the potential transfer costs. I note that the minister’s letter to the committee estimates that the

“total cost over these six years now ranges from £2.1 million to £28.1 million, with a central estimate of £15.1 million”.

That remains a significant concern. I want every Scottish apprenticeship pound to go to the delivery of more apprenticeship places and opportunities, rather than expensive structural changes. I am also disappointed that, during the debate, the Government has not accepted the need for more and better transparency around the apprenticeship levy.

We on the Conservative benches also agree with the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, which we have been working with. It believes that the bill lacks a systemic evidenced-based approach, and that there has been insufficient engagement with key partners, especially local authorities and employers. There are financial risks to successful existing programmes such as foundation apprenticeships, and the bill has the potential to negatively impact young people, particularly the most disadvantaged and those who are furthest away from the education system. The concerns that the association has expressed have not been taken forward. I hope that ministers will not see the bill as an end point; work needs to be done to protect apprenticeship places, especially foundation apprenticeships, as has been raised during the debate.

The Scottish Conservatives hoped that the bill would be a genuine opportunity for a culture shift across our education and skills system. We hoped that current working relationships within our college sector, as part of the wider tertiary sector, could be more collaborative, so that colleges could be empowered to become the drivers of change, rather than merely receiving funding. Empowering our college sector to deliver opportunities in local areas needs to be reconsidered. Audit Scotland has said that the college sector has seen a 17 per cent reduction in real-terms funding in the past three years alone, which has resulted in colleges having to deliver significant annual savings, with fewer students and fewer lecturers.

The Scottish Conservatives will work to make sure that the next Government and the Parliament in its next session genuinely develop a skills bill. We would propose bold and practical measures to invest in our colleges, fix Scotland’s broken apprenticeship system, address skills shortages and allow local employers to shape training to match their workforce needs, as others in different parts of the United Kingdom can. Sadly, this bill has been a missed opportunity for the Government and the Parliament to take forward significant legislation that would deliver for our skills sector. That is why the Scottish Conservatives will not be able to support the bill at decision time.

Maybe Mr Hepburn’s involvement in the matter should also have generated some asking of questions about where that money is being spent in Scotland—that does not seem to have resulted in any more additional transparency.

Mr Hepburn often talks about this Parliament not being respected by Westminster, so I am not sure why the Scottish Government does not want to build stronger links with Westminster to find out where that money is being spent and, indeed, to provide the transparency that we are asking for. It can work both ways, and my amendments would provide the opportunity for that information to be made—

Following some debate and discussion at stage 2, I lodged a number of amendments to look towards a definition of a Scottish apprenticeship. Specifically, I stated during stage 2 that I felt that the bill had missed an opportunity to provide improvements to the terms and conditions for apprentices and also to develop clear pathways to employment.

As the bill stands, there is no requirement for an apprentice to have a contract of employment or to be paid rather than receive other forms of reward. There is also no specific reference to the development and demonstration of competence in key areas, which is where I had hoped that the Government would work more with us to look for solutions.

From the outset, the Scottish Conservatives have expressed our concern that the bill could jeopardise foundation apprenticeships by removing them from the apprenticeship family as they stand and reclassifying them as as-yet-undefined work-based learning courses. Taking out formally assessed Scottish Qualifications Authority work placements and leaving a school-based “skills-for-work” type of course on its own would not achieve the same outcomes as a foundation apprenticeship.

Every MSP will have met people who are undertaking foundation apprenticeships and will have seen the huge opportunities and pathways into work that they provide. I have raised this issue privately and publicly with the minister. I am concerned about the loss of foundation apprenticeships, which is something that I want to highlight, as will Brian Whittle when he speaks to his amendments. We want to give the Parliament the opportunity to retain foundation apprenticeships as part of the bill. Given that the bill is still relatively vague in this area, there is no confidence that it will provide the certainty and the sound footing that are necessary for the continued delivery of foundation apprenticeships, which are internationally recognised and are a real Scottish success story.

The Government should have paused to consider what is essential if we are to meet the ambitions of our Scottish education system and to deliver on its key education priorities. As we debate stage 3, there is a lack of focus in the bill on the frameworks to support and protect apprenticeships—it has fallen short in that area.

I will listen to what the minister has to say in deciding whether to move amendments 76, 78, 80 and 82, in my name. However, for now, I intend to move them.

We will see. For now, I press amendment 75.

Will the member give way?

My amendments 87, 88 and 90 build on amendments that I lodged at stage 2, when I hoped that ministers would acknowledge the cross-party support that exists for more transparency on the apprenticeship levy.

Businesses and industry leaders across Scotland have argued for some time that we need stronger transparency in how the levy is applied and spent in Scotland. As I said at stage 2, the ability to follow funding that is raised by businesses in Scotland from the apprenticeship levy through our training system in Scotland is not easy—in fact, it is often impossible.

The apprenticeship levy is a UK-wide tax on employers and is collected by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. It came into force in 2017 and is set at 0.5 per cent of an employer’s annual wage bill. It is collected across the whole UK, but the way that funds are used and allocated differs. In Scotland, levy receipts go to the Scottish Government via the block grant. However, in England, levy-paying employers access their own digital accounts to spend funds directly on apprenticeships. That is another reform that we would have liked to see in the bill, but it has not been included.

HMRC data shows that at least £875 million was raised by Scottish employers under the apprenticeship levy between 2020 and 2024. However, data shows that only £704 million has been spent on graduate, foundation or modern apprenticeships by Skills Development Scotland, the Scottish Funding Council or the Student Awards Agency Scotland, which means that there is a £171 million black hole in what should have gone on apprenticeship funding and which has been diverted elsewhere.

Yes.

Yes, I agree with that. One of the missed opportunities is that the bill does not deal with regional skills shortages. On Friday, I was in Aberdeen, where I heard about not just the opportunities but the shortages that exist there. There is real concern that the bill has watered down the voice of industry. We need to strengthen it, and that is why I want to—