Chamber and committees

The premise of Ms Duncan-Glancy’s question is that ASN can be met only by an ASN teacher, but that is not the case. As we know, 95 per cent of pupils who are identified as having additional support needs are in mainstream education. Classroom teachers in Scotland have a responsibility to meet additional support needs, which is why they are provided with support to do that in their teacher training—

That takes me back to the point that I made previously, which is that we need to reduce class contact time. We do so by providing funding through the budget. If other parties can get behind it, we can deliver on that goal by putting in the extra teachers who are needed to allow us to reduce class contact and to create the time for teachers to engage in relation to ASN.

Roles and responsibilities are important here. Mr Rennie knows that local authorities are the employers. What we have done through the budget agreement, which was made in good faith—

That goes back to the challenge that we have been discussing about the relationship between local and central Government and how that is enacted in our classrooms. We have spoken about the reality that workload, in the main, is not being driven by national Government. In the main, as you all know, I do not have many levers that I can operate in my relationship with local authorities, so I have to work in partnership with them.

I have said to the professional associations that we must revisit the agenda with our local government partners to ensure that they are not adding to teacher workload. One way that we can do that is through the curriculum improvement cycle. I do not know whether we are going to talk about that today, because time is short. However, the curriculum improvement cycle allows us an opportunity to re-evaluate what we prescribe at national level and what we allow to be open to choice and local discretion, and a key issue that has come out of the headteacher events is the need for greater clarity and greater standardisation. Teachers want that to be spelled out for them in a way that I am not necessarily sure that we have done through the curriculum for excellence. Arguably, there has been too much fluidity in the system, which has not necessarily been as supportive as it could have been.

When we talk about reporting requirements, for example, or about tracking and monitoring, a bit more prescription and rigour in the system, particularly in primary education, would help to alleviate some of what is being asked for at the local authority level, given that we see local authorities doing lots of different things. If we had greater consistency on, for example, ASN, behaviour or how literacy levels are recorded, it would automatically alleviate the workload. I have been keen to press that point through the education assurance board.

We have also been in discussions with COSLA about the role of SEEMiS, which Mr Greer will know is the main reporting system that is used in Scottish schools. It is quite clunky and old, and we might be able to work in different ways in the future. For example, that system does not join up with the system for early years education, although we have been developing a new approach to that.

I am keen to revisit that agenda in partnership with local government. I appreciate the challenge from Mr Greer. There are opportunities through curriculum improvement and education reform. Mr Greer will also know about my cautiousness in relation to some of the work on education reform. That is because I taught in a school not that long ago and I know that we need to be mindful about the workload implications of changing our qualifications system. I am not sure that we reflected on that in the right way the last time that we did that, so, this time, we have to work with the profession.

That is why we have people such as Andy Brown, who is a maths specialist and a former headteacher, on secondment. He is leading all our work on numeracy. He is a subject specialist and he has credibility with the profession. It is only by using the profession to drive the curriculum change that we can also reduce workload. The profession must be part of leading some of the change that we need in our curriculum and, in so doing, alleviating the workload issues at the classroom level that Mr Greer rightly raises.

I think that that information in relation to that local authority is in the public domain. I have absolute faith that COSLA will want to stand by the deal, which was made in good faith. We will continue to engage with councils such as South Lanarkshire Council to ensure that it maintains teacher numbers at 2023 levels, which was the condition of the funding that was provided in response to the budget ask.

We do not want to be in the situation that cabinet secretaries prior to my time in office have faced—it is also a situation that I have faced—whereby we get the teacher census in December and there is a cliff-edge moment in relation to whether the Government will claw back funding. I do not want to be in that position again, and it is not a position that any cabinet secretary should be in. We should operate in good faith, and when we make such agreements in good faith, the Government should rightly be able to expect that they are delivered on. We will continue to work with local authorities to that end.

I think that Ms Don-Innes gave a response on the mothballing guidance earlier. We are going to engage with local authorities throughout the summer in relation to responding to that consultation. I think that Mr Briggs and his colleagues have asked me a number of written parliamentary questions on the matter recently.

The matter is a concern to me. We have challenges across the country in relation to recruitment, which I think are playing out in some of the challenges that local authorities are experiencing. However, the important point in relation to the mothballing or closure of schools is that, ultimately, that is the responsibility of local authorities. The schools belong to them and not to Government ministers, so we need to respect their autonomy. In doing so, however, we also need to work with them to support local communities.

The matter is a concern, but we are committed to working with COSLA on it. I think that the updated guidance will go some way towards alleviating some of that concern and perhaps to alleviating the concerns that parents and carers groups have raised with me in recent months.

No. As I understand it, the engagement is to happen over the summer.

We have to accept that, since 2014, in the round, teacher numbers have increased by more than 2,500. However, it is my clear expectation—I think that this is the point that Mr FitzPatrick was making before he left the room—that teacher numbers will increase in the next year, because we have put in the extra resource to allow local authorities to do that. If they are not able to do that, we will be unable to deliver on reducing class contact time. That goes back to my point that all these things are inherently linked. Our aspiration is to return to 2023 teacher levels to allow us to deliver on reducing class contact time.

I mentioned earlier some of the action that we are taking to support local authorities with funding to help with school trips, for example, and the support that we can provide through the pupil equity fund. Mr Briggs is right to highlight the funding for free school meals, because it has been a challenge for the Government. I accept that and I have discussed it with the committee. We brought forward a Scottish statutory instrument, which I was at the committee recently to debate, and we talked about how we could broaden eligibility by getting children who are in receipt of the Scottish child payment signed up to free school meals. Free school meals are saving families an average of £450 a year, so they are making a difference.

Mr Briggs talked about the increase in the cost of school meals. That has been impacted by inflation. Everything is more expensive now. Wages are going up and things cost more. We work with local authorities in relation to that, but they have statutory responsibilities at the local level. We have given them a significant uplift of more than £1 billion in their settlement this year, so significant extra funding is going to local authorities. We know that many local authorities do not pursue school meal debt. That is in the gift of local authorities; they can decide not to do that.

On the point that the member asks me about, we previously set out guidance on the issue, working with COSLA to be clear about our expectations. We also made extra funding available to help local authorities to write off school meal debt. We have taken a range of measures to work with councils to help to alleviate the costs that are associated with school meals and to support families more broadly.

I understand that the child poverty group will meet next Monday, but I am more than happy to write to the committee to discuss those issues in the round. I know that there are significant issues in relation to temporary housing, and I very much support the member’s point on the consistency of educational provision, particularly when a child has had disruption in their private life.

I support the member’s point, but I will come back to him on the substantives in relation to my engagement with the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice.