Chamber and committees

Thank you.

Have you looked specifically at the fall in retention rates for care-experienced young people, given that some bespoke packages are made available? I visited Edinburgh university recently and looked at the student accommodation for the year-round offer that can be provided if young people want it. Why are we seeing that fall? All of us around the table are looking to the Government’s forthcoming Promise bill, and we are now at the mid-point, so the fact that we are going backwards is really concerning. What has been problematic and can we take any learning from it?

I know that I am putting you on the spot by asking about different institutions but, following Professor Peter Mathieson’s message to staff at the University of Edinburgh, which basically said that radical action will be needed to find £140 million of savings, I have received a number of communications from constituents who work there. Unions have described that as suggesting that there will be devastating cuts and a lot of people who work in the institution are worried about their jobs and futures.

I know that you cannot comment on individual universities, but is that now a sector-wide issue? We have already discussed the University of Dundee. What is your understanding of university finances across Scotland? We now seem to be seeing a drip, drip, drip effect across institutions, which is deeply worrying for staff and raises questions about the future sustainability of such an important sector of our economy.

We heard that teachers talked to one another and did not understand why pupils had underperformed. The cabinet secretary said that overpresentation was a key theme in the report and that students were potentially sitting exams at a level that they were not ready for, which impacted on performance. Is it your understanding that there is overpresentation that sets young people up to fail?

I have a couple of questions about literacy standards. It has been suggested that one key reason for the fall in performance in higher history is candidates’ literacy standards. However, we have not seen similar falls in marks in other literacy-based subjects. What work has the SQA undertaken to analyse whether candidates who took higher history also performed worse in other subjects? What plans are being put in place to publish that?

Thank you for that.

I return to Pam Duncan-Glancy’s question. Has there been a failure in exam timetabling this year?

I asked that question because I met a constituent on Monday whose daughter is sitting psychology, and there was initially an exam clash with English. To be honest, I do not understand why any other exam was scheduled to be on the same day as higher English, given that no fewer than 34,000 pupils have sat it in any of the past five years. The SQA has now said that, in the interest of wellbeing, the psychology exam will be moved forward by two weeks. You used the analogy of someone who is planning to sit their driving test. It is concerning for young people who are planning when they will sit their exams to be told that they will now sit one of them two weeks earlier than they expected. That increases the pressure on them.

I know that timetabling is not a perfect science, but I do not understand why the contingency date of 2 June was not used for the psychology exam, given the lower numbers of candidates that were presenting. That is why I asked the question. Although you have said that you listened to other partners, it seems that parents and young people have not been part of that conversation. What seems to be a very straightforward solution, which I have just put to you, has not been taken forward and that is now putting more pressure on young people and teachers.

Would it not therefore have been more sensible to move psychology to that date rather than forward? The rationale that SQA has outlined relates to pupil wellbeing, but moving an exam forward is seen by parents and pupils not as being for their wellbeing but stressful. I did not understand the timetabling. Given the significant changes that have been put in place, it feels like the timetabling for this set of exams has been more problematic than in previous years.

It goes without saying that we all want to see the Promise delivered. However, I am sorry to say that the statement does not feel like the words of a Government that is on course to meet the Promise. For example, in it, the Government congratulates itself on homelessness legislation when the fact is that, over the past two years, there has been a 14 per cent increase in the number of care leavers under the age of 25 who have been made homeless or threatened with homelessness. That is a complete failure.

Nowhere in the statement is the national social work agency mentioned, but the agency will be key to delivering the Promise. What is the vision for the national social work agency, and when will the agency be delivered?

The fact is that the hospice sector is facing a double whammy of national insurance increases and meeting the agenda for change. The £5 million announced in the budget is welcome, but the sector is calling for £15 million to stand still. We know that £350 million is available in contingency funds in the Scottish Government’s NHS budget for the current financial year. If the issue is not addressed, hospices across Scotland—which are setting their budgets now—will see the disparity increase even further. Is the Scottish Government looking to provide the £15 million that the sector needs, and not just the £5 million that is currently in the budget?