Chamber and committees

I do not want to prejudge the outcome of that work, but it is important and it is under way. I have set out some of the steps that are being taken, but Mr Greer was instrumental last year in ensuring that the Government put extra money into the budget to provide for an increase in teacher numbers and for ASN. That extra funding is making a difference. For example, it means that higher numbers of pupil support assistants are being employed locally than was previously the case.

We can protect education budgets in our negotiations—I am very amenable to listening to members’ views on that, because they are important. In the coming weeks, I will be involved in budget negotiations with the finance secretary, so if members have views, I am all ears.

In response to your point, Mr O’Kane, I would say that we have actually had a very successful year in Scottish education with regard to the recovery in our schools and that we are turning a corner.

In my statement to Parliament last week, I highlighted improvements in attainment, a narrowing of the attainment gap, the smaller class sizes in our primary schools and the increases in teacher numbers, and I should say that we have also seen real improvement in this year’s examination results. If we go back to the 2019 figures, we will see that there have been real improvements, with the gap narrowing; of course, 2019 was the last time that we could make those judgments, given the pandemic, but we have seen attainment rise across the board. The generation who have worked through our schools have had support. Indeed, the Government provided some of that additional support during the pandemic, with the employment of extra teachers at the time—which was, I should say, prior to my time in this role.

I think that this year’s education results, particularly in our schools, tell us that recovery is happening. We need to reflect better on how we can support our schools, and part of that will involve reviewing how we fund the Scottish attainment challenge. My party and—I think—Mr O’Kane’s party have given a public commitment in our manifestos for next year’s election to continuing the Scottish attainment challenge. That is important, but what I think has shifted since the implementation of the challenge 10 years ago is the normalisation of poverty in our schools, the existence of food and clothing banks and schools now being stretched to meet societal needs in ways that they might not have been stretched previously.

Therefore, we need to look at and review the fund. It is part of the work that, as I alluded to in my response to Mr Greer, John Wilson, a former headteacher, is leading, but we need to be mindful of how we can bring additionality to our schools in the post-pandemic period to support the recovery work that I believe is happening and which I believe has been evidenced by last week’s statistics and this year’s exam results.

Of course they matter, but they have been living through a period of austerity. Do we really think that schools exist in isolation? We should be mindful of societal changes that mean that families—

First, in relation to victims—again, I will say more about this later in my statement to Parliament—we all need to be mindful that, when we talk about these subjects in the chamber, in the committee or in the media, it is traumatising to victims, so we need to be mindful of our language. I will put that on the record again today. I am sure that, like me, members have been inundated with emails from the public—perhaps victims—in relation to their experiences. I am therefore very mindful of treating the issue with the sensitivity that it deserves.

On who will be leading the work, as I announced to Parliament two weeks ago today, the four inspectorates have a role to play, and they will carry out their work. I will say more about that in my statement to Parliament. Alexis Jay is chairing the national strategic group, which is hugely important in that regard.

What Alexis Jay said to the committee this morning and what she said to me when I met her recently is that we do not yet have the evidence base to arrive at a decision as to whether further inquiries are needed. When we have that evidence base, the Government will need to take a decision, and it may be that a figurehead is appointed. I think that you asked Alexis Jay whether that would be something that she would lead on. I do not want to prejudge the outcome of the evidence gathering that is necessary to establish whether further inquiries are necessary.

In relation to victims, I thought that it was quite helpful that, last Monday, the Scottish child abuse inquiry made it very clear that, should it be within the terms of reference of its inquiry, people who have been victims of grooming can come forward and should contact the inquiry in relation to historical cases, which that inquiry is looking at additionally.

I want to say a bit more on engagement with victims, and I will set some of this out in my statement. I heard some of the commentary that Alexis Jay provided in relation to the truth project work that was led down south. Last week, along with the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise, I spoke to Tam Baillie about some of that work and listened to some of that expertise. We would want to be able to set out a fuller update to Parliament in that space.

I will say more on that today, but I am mindful of the important points that the convener makes about victims, who will be watching very closely and who have been let down by systems. It is hugely important that what we put in place has their faith and their trust, and that we can deliver on their expectations in that regard. I will always be resolutely focused on that as cabinet secretary.

I would encourage committee members, if they have contact from victims, to please share information if they are able to. We, as ministers, have made it very clear in our engagement with the strategic group that we want to engage directly. This is a priority for the Government, not just for me as cabinet secretary.

I am not necessarily sure that I would say that that was correct.

As I understand it, Alexis Jay met last week with His Majesty’s chief inspector of constabulary and the Care Inspectorate, and Ms Don-Innes and I had a helpful meeting with officials on the matter this morning. The work is under way. Those inspectorates have their own independent leadership teams that lead on their work, so leadership is being provided by the inspectorate teams, and Alexis Jay chairs the national strategic group.

I have responsibility for child protection, but the work to act on child sexual abuse is a cross-Government endeavour, as you have just heard from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs. This is not only about one area of Government; we all have responsibilities in that regard. To reassure the committee, there have been cabinet discussions on the topic. The First Minister is taking a leading role on the topic, which is currently of the utmost importance to the Government.

I hear your point in relation to leadership, and when I set out my statement to the Parliament today, I hope that I will be able to provide further clarity on that. I think that your points about victims have been well made.

My view is that we should be supportive of mandatory reporting. That is the view of my minister, and I believe that it is also the view of the justice secretary. We have previously met and discussed the issue. I will say more on the topic later today, but I confirm for the committee—as I thought you might ask about it—that I am very supportive of mandatory reporting.

It is hugely important, and it speaks to one of the issues that Alexis Jay flushed out, which is the lack of data under current reporting processes. The issue with child sexual abuse is that, often, hidden and power dynamics are at play. Gathering data in that space is challenging, but the view that I share with Ms Don-Innes and Ms Constance is that mandatory reporting is important in order to gather a more robust data set. We do not have the data at the current time, which is exactly why the review is so important.

Mr Briggs, are you referring to the petition that relates to whistleblowing?

I heard your question on that point, convener, and I heard Professor Alexis Jay say in response that she is supportive of the approach that we have put out in principle. It is important that the committee and Parliament recognise that she will have a role in relation to supporting the methodology and providing expertise to the national review. That is hugely important, to my mind. She also said that we will know, within the course of the next few months, the impacts of that work. I want to be careful, convener, because I will be giving a statement to Parliament later today on the issues, but I am very pleased that we have her expertise involved in the work.

I should also say—I think that Professor Alexis Jay touched on some of this work as well, although I did not listen to her full evidence session—that the inspectorates are all independent of Government. They have statutory responsibilities. Importantly, they also have statutory powers to investigate, which ministers do not have, so the evidence base that the inspectorates will be key in delivering will provide us with further information on the scale and the challenge in relation to child sexual abuse across the country.

I also heard from Professor Alexis Jay’s evidence that, at the current time, we do not have a sufficient evidence base. I think that she also said that that is not unique to Scotland. However, it is imperative that that evidence base is built upon, and the Government is taking forward that work. I look forward to saying a bit more on that this afternoon, but for committee members’ reassurance—and I think that you acknowledged this, convener—I have organised for Professor Alexis Jay and Police Scotland to give a private briefing to MSPs, which I think is hugely important, in January.

Forty-three per cent.

I have.