Chamber and committees

Amendments 302 and 303 concern the appointment of the chief inspector of education. The purpose of the amendments is to ensure that the appointment process for that crucial post is robust, transparent and principled. The bill, as introduced, creates a position of chief inspector, but it does so with minimal definition regarding who should be eligible to hold that office and how long they should serve in that role. In a role of such significance to the quality and integrity of Scotland’s education system, that omission is neither trivial nor technical.

Amendment 302 proposes that, to be eligible for appointment as chief inspector, an individual must be a qualified teacher and have held a senior leadership role within a school or other educational establishment. That is not an exclusion clause; rather, it is a statement of principle that those who lead the scrutiny of education in Scotland should have substantial and relevant experience of the sector that they will be inspecting.

I have been listening to the member and my only concern about amendment 6 is that it would politicise qualifications Scotland, in that he would be placing on it a duty to take into account the Government of the day’s priorities in the development of courses. Does he recognise that, and has he thought about what that might mean for an organisation that should be focused on what the economy needs, not necessarily on what the priorities of politicians in Government are?

The cabinet secretary will know how keen a consensus builder my colleague Stephen Kerr is, so with that in mind, I will not press amendment 302 or move amendment 303, and we can all look forward to working together on what will, I hope, be workable amendments for stage 3.

Amendment 302, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendments 76, 303 and 142 to 144 not moved.

I would be happy to do that. I hoped that this group would have amendments from other members, because there are other things that would be of benefit to the bill. There is probably support for this within the governing party as well. I hope that there will be an opportunity to widen the offering in the bill at stage 3. Considering the number of pupils with additional support needs in our schools, it is important that the new organisations embed that support.

That is a good point. The other amendments in the group, which are in Pam Duncan-Glancy’s name, propose the creation of a new agency—curriculum Scotland—to do the work in question. My colleague Stephen Kerr has been trying to improve the bill by defining in it the future role of Education Scotland in education. That is an important aspect, because we have all been looking at that organisation and wondering what it will do in the future and how it can be improved.

At the root of the challenge that we face in reforming the education system is the urgent need to provide clarification of who is responsible for what. As the OECD report rightly reminded us, governance clarity is not simply administrative tidiness; it is a precondition for effective oversight and learner-centred improvement.

I look forward to hearing from Pam Duncan-Glancy and the cabinet secretary.

I move amendment 290.

I am not sure how Pam Duncan-Glancy intends to vote on my colleague Stephen Kerr’s amendment 290, but that amendment would give Education Scotland the formal responsibility that, basically, her amendments would give to a new organisation. The minister is about to comment but I note that, currently, Education Scotland, Government departments and the University of Glasgow are doing work on that. Is there an opportunity, as part of the bill, to bring that into one single organisation, without costing the taxpayer more? That organisation could—and probably should—be Education Scotland.

I thank Ross Greer for teeing me up.

Good morning to members of the committee. I start by thanking the committee clerks and the legislation team for their help with amendments.

On amendment 129, the bill mentions a learner charter and an educator charter, but it does not include a parent and carer charter, and we need to correct that. A later amendment of mine would bring in such a charter. Amendment 129 provides for at least one member of the strategic advisory council to represent parents and carers of children and young people who are undertaking qualifications.

We all know about the positive contribution that parents and carers make to our school community, but they are also the people who prepare and support our young people to sit exams. In recent times, I have been concerned that the exam diet has been changed without any real consultation with or involvement of parents and carers. As such, I hope that this reform will, in due course, help to make sure that people can play a positive role in representing the interests of parents and carers.

I take on board what Ross Greer said about amendment 129. That is about the wording of the bill, and it is why the later definition amendments are important—so that people will be able to read those in the legislation. I will move my amendment, unless the minister thinks that it would be worth changing the wording. I do not necessarily think that it would, given that a later amendment provides that definition. I will be happy to move amendment 129 and to hear from the minister on that in due course.

Given that the bill will be sent to the King to sign, has the member taken any legal advice on the prospect of it coming back and slowing up the creation of these organisations? I do not think that the minister—or, indeed, anyone—wants that to happen, but it could potentially occur.

My amendments 130 and 208 in this group go to the heart of what I am trying to achieve as part of the bill, which I think is something that we all want to achieve: building confidence in the new organisation. I have listened to the cabinet secretary, who outlined that we need to do that for carers and for teachers, but we also need to do it for parents. That is why I want to see that triad as part of the bill; why I am pleased that the committee has agreed an amendment on a parent, or guardian, or carer, being part of the strategic advisory council; and why my amendment 130 would ask that qualifications Scotland has a specific duty to set up a parent and carer charter. It is important to provide that definition.

I take on board what the cabinet secretary has said in relation to care-experienced young people and the interest committees, which I think are working quite well to take forward the Promise in that area. There is a really positive role to be played in that regard.

For Stephen Kerr’s clarification, I support amendment 278. [Laughter.] I think that it would add value to the bill. I will end my contribution there.

On reflection, I think that there are drafting issues with amendment 131. As the opportunity exists for additional amendments to be lodged, I am happy, at this stage, not to press amendment 131 and to work with ministers and others ahead of stage 3.

Amendment 131, by agreement, withdrawn.

Section 14—Corporate plan of Qualifications Scotland