Chamber and committees

Absolutely.

I understand that. I see that Ms Don-Innes, who is leading on Ms Smith’s bill, wants to come in on this question, but I will say, though, that we want to progress our engagement with Ms Smith on her bill, and I very much acknowledge the importance of outdoor education in my own responsibilities. Like Ms Smith, I am a former teacher in the classroom, and we know that it makes a huge difference.

With that, I will bring in Ms Don-Innes, who, as I have said, has been leading on the bill.

I think that Mr Greer has raised an important point: the information should be published in a far more timely way than it currently is. I am advised that it is to do with our having to disaggregate all the information and to go back to local authorities, which takes time. We also get evidence from community services and from schools, and we need to bring all that together. However, we should be able to do it more quickly, and I will take the matter away and speak to officials about how we might do that.

The member has also made an important point in relation to the gender divide and the fact that our boys are not accessing counselling services in the same way that our girls are. I think that that speaks to changes in society more broadly; we have talked briefly about misogyny and toxic masculinity. I am worried about a generation of young boys growing up in an Andrew Tate society and we need to consider what more we can do to support them, whether that be through Government approaches such as the gender-based violence framework or through role models in schools. We have some fantastic male teachers in our secondary schools, and it is important that our young boys have role models in their lives to whom they can relate. When we talk about these kinds of gender splits, it is important that we reflect on that data.

I will take away both points—that is, on gender and on more timely publication of the data. Perhaps I can reassure the member if I tell him that the data set, I am told, will be published in the coming weeks.

Convener, I was just checking with my officials that the Government-initiated question has now been published.

Eight local authorities will be funded through our test of change work, which allows us to look at how we might be able to scale up the delivery of free school meals in the future. Schools across the country have different needs. The GIQ sets that out in more detail, but it looks at secondary schools in particular.

I gave evidence to the committee on ASN last September, and at that time I gave an update on the refreshed code of practice. On the back of listening and responding to the committee, we made a number of changes to that.

Since that time, we have also had a parliamentary debate, in which the Government committed to a further review of ASN and how it is delivered. I contacted all parties this week to set up a meeting to look at the scope of that review, while being mindful that, as we undertake the review, we will also have to consider the code of practice, which is being updated anyway. I want committee members and Parliament to feed into that process, as far as possible.

The code of practice is fundamental, but when we consider ASN in its totality, we need to think about how children and young people experience support in schools. When I meet headteachers, classroom assistants and teachers, I am struck by the variation in how needs are met across the country. That has been the subject of recent debate, so it would be remiss of me not to talk about it.

There is a programme for government commitment that looks at better data collection. There is also the Audit Scotland report, which I accept provides a great challenge to the Government, but which I also welcome, because it talks about the need for transparency about ASN spend. The committee will be well aware that we spent more than £1 billion last year in relation to ASN, and the budget bakes in an extra £29 million for local authorities to be used for specialist staff. Transparency and the need for granularity are important.

There have also been arguments and suggestions for a national staged intervention model; Graeme Logan might want to say a little bit more about that. We have been discussing that with headteachers, because they have been clear in their discussions with me that they want to see consistency from local authorities on how their staff experience support and wraparound care for children and young people. The code of practice can go some way towards responding to that, but the wider request from Parliament for the review also has to take that work into consideration.

As I understand it, issuing letters of guidance was undertaken by somebody who sat in my position historically. Stuart Greig might want to say more on how we might be able to stipulate that, but it relates to the letters of guidance that we issue to the Scottish Funding Council, which is usually done at the start of the year.

I reiterate that the level of young people who have gone on to a positive destination three months after leaving school is 95.7 per cent, which is the second-highest level since records began. Therefore, I am not sure that I can accept the totality of what Ms Duncan-Glancy has said. When we look in the round at the—

I am not aware of the specific together to thrive programme, but I would be more than happy to engage in a visit with the member, perhaps during Parliament’s summer recess, after schools have gone back, to learn more about how that works.

On the substantive point about engagement with parents, no behaviour improvement plan will work without buy-in and support from parents. We have consistently seen that in relation to the way in which teachers have taken forward mobile phone bans. That will not work if you do not get the buy-in of mums, dads, parents and carers—you have to get that buy-in from home. When I launched mobile phone guidance back in August, I spoke to the head teacher at Stonelaw high school about the work that she had undertaken with the kids and with the school community, parents and carers to mine their own data so that they could look at how much time they were spending online and on screen. She got the buy-in of her whole school community by doing that, which took time but was the right approach for her school.

The same approach should apply in relation to behaviour. Many parents and carers are struggling after the pandemic and they turn to the school because that is often the service that is open. School is a constant in a young person’s life, but it is also a constant for many of our parents and carers who are unable to obtain support elsewhere. I was in a school in Dundee last summer and learned about approaches that they are using, through PEF, to support income maximisation officers who can support families with the cost of bills. We would not have countenanced using SAC funds for those things 10 years ago, but that funding is undoubtedly now being used to meet a wide range of family needs. That helps to close the poverty-related attainment gap, but we must be mindful not only of how support goes out to parents but of how it comes back to the school.

As I said, I would be happy to go on a visit with Mr FitzPatrick in the near future.

Your point about consequences has been raised with me consistently by the profession, and a range of consequences is already at teachers’ disposal. However, we know that there is currently reticence about the use of exclusion, for example. As I understand it, that will be for good reason—it should be used in only the most extreme examples of challenging behaviour—but it is a consequence that is at teachers’ disposal. Ultimately, it is up to them to exercise their professional judgment as to whether that is appropriate; it is not for me, as cabinet secretary, to instruct it.

The point raised in your question of last week is a live one. Tomorrow we will host a second summit on youth violence, which I will attend along with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice. We will have cross-portfolio engagement on the issue of consequences. Of course, that will feed into our work on the same issue, which, as I said, we will publish before the end of term.