Chamber and committees

The PEF sampling work has been pivotal in looking at clear-cut examples of where PEF has made a difference. I am sure that the member will be aware of examples from her constituency. Every headteacher whom I meet at the events that we host and at school visits is asking me not to take PEF or Scottish attainment challenge funding away.

If members remember, the funding stream was always meant to be a 10-year funding stream. I have discussed that with the committee and given it and Parliament an assurance that the funding will continue to 2026-27, which is as far as any Government can go. I suspect that there is probably cross-party consensus that it is important that the SAC funding is maintained and that there is a PEF budget line within that.

I have said at the headteacher events that I have been to that I am struck by the normalisation of poverty in our schools, and the existence of food banks and clothing banks. The reality in our schools is that PEF is being used to meet needs that it did not have to meet 10 years ago. That means that the funding is being used in lots of creatively different ways to impact on our schools. For example, a primary school in Kirkcaldy that I visited recently was using it to fund a parents’ group. On the face of it, that might not be considered to be an educational intervention, but it is about getting mums involved in their children’s education and, in so doing, helping to improve attendance and attainment.

There is a link between allowing our headteachers the autonomy to use that extra funding for best use and the requirement of the Government to reflect on the impact of PEF. We have done that through the PEF sampling report, which tells us a positive story about the detailed impact that it has had.

We also need to ask, what more? Schools are responding to a need that they might not have had to meet in the past, so we are required to reflect on how we resource our schools post-pandemic. I have been keen to discuss that point with headteachers at the national events.

It is the second highest since records began.

That has not been deprioritised. It was part of the Bute house agreement, which I am sure that Mr Greer will want to come in on. It is tricky, because there are 32 councils that often do 32 different things when it comes to education; getting them all to agree on something is not without challenge, as the committee knows, because we regularly debate such matters.

Some local authorities—I would like to heap praise on mine, which might surprise Mr Rennie—have an approach to accreditation that involves supporting staff who join the pupil support workforce to become accredited at a certain level; other local authorities take different approaches and do not require accreditation. We will look to publish the report on that in the coming weeks.

I want to put on record my thanks to Mr Greer for all his input on the issue, which I am sure that we will discuss in further detail. ASN accreditation has been a key ask of the profession. I am absolutely committed to delivering on it, but I need to get agreement from local authorities, and from COSLA in particular, on how we roll that out nationally.

Engagement with the trade unions throughout the process has been fundamental and key to all that we have done. As Mr FitzPatrick will know, I went to Dundee some months ago to meet with the unions directly; the breakdown in the relationship is historical, to some extent, but it has been crystallised by the events in recent months. I have been very keen to meet the trade unions directly every other week to hear from them, to test their thinking, to ensure that the information flow is what they would expect, and to hear their members’ views throughout what has been a challenging time for them and for staff across the university. I want to put that on record, because it has been really challenging for them.

Ministers are here to help and support—that is the role that I have been playing as cabinet secretary, alongside Mr Dey, as minister. Most recently, we met the trade unions last Thursday, and at that point, it felt as though things were in a better space. The VS scheme launched on Friday and I hope that that has helped, too.

Mr Fitzpatrick has raised an issue about the Government’s ability to say something on this matter. We are very keen to say something as soon as we are able to, but we have to respect the processes. As he will understand, this is about public money and, therefore, it is essential that the SFC is able to carry out its work in accordance with its governance processes, regardless of ministers. That needs to be set aside, but we hope to be able to say something as soon as we are able to about the support that we can provide the University of Dundee.

There is a clear focus on reducing teacher workload, but I take the member’s point.

I met the Scottish Council of Independent Schools last year, I think, to talk about some of its concerns, which I have relayed to the UK Government. The UK Government has adopted that policy position, and I have to say that it is one that the Scottish Government supports.

We were originally told that the VAT on that sector would mean consequentials for Scotland—the member has asked me a number of written PQs on that. That seems to have changed in relation to how the budget allocation has been made, so we are now no longer able to make that differentiation. That is quite challenging, because we understood that there would be additional moneys coming to Scotland as a result of that budgetary movement, but that has not been the case.

We have stayed very close to the Scottish Council for Independent Schools throughout and our officials engage with it regularly, and we also engage with COSLA. Although I do not have the numbers to hand, I recently responded to the member’s written PQ with the detail and the data on that.

The issue affects Edinburgh more than other local authorities in Scotland—I know that the member is particularly interested in that—because of the number of young people who are enrolled in the private sector. Our modelling and our understanding is that there is currently capacity in the school estate to absorb any pupils who come out of the private sector. However, if Mr Briggs has examples of where that is not the case, I will be more than happy to hear about those today and to engage directly with the City of Edinburgh Council or other local authorities with cases that he might want to raise.

I am hearing Mr Rennie talk over me. I hear what he is saying. I am well aware of the challenge, because it is put to me regularly. The issue that I face as cabinet secretary is one that we will keep coming back to in this committee, namely that the Government does not employ our teachers. Every education secretary before me has faced the same challenge in relation to how we can get local government to commit to protecting teacher numbers, because we know that that is what makes a difference in our classrooms.

It is worth pointing out that, since 2014, the number of permanent posts has remained static at around 80 per cent. There has also been an increase of 2,500 in the number of teachers in Scotland’s schools, because we are protecting funding for teacher numbers. On what would have happened had we not done that, COSLA’s 2022 budget proposal included a reduction of up to 8,000 teachers. That is not acceptable.

I hear Mr Rennie expressing the anger from the profession. I accept that, and I have taken action. For the academic year 2025-26, the initial teacher education intake for primary school teaching programmes has been reduced by 10 per cent to respond to that exact criticism and that exact point. However, it is not good enough for us to have a continued debate about the Government not acting when the Government cannot employ teachers, so what is the answer to Mr Rennie’s point? We have to work with local authorities. The work that has begun to establish an education and childcare assurance board is part of that. The budget agreement, which was made in good faith, absolutely has to be about not making throwaway comments but putting cold hard cash into the system to employ ASN teachers, ASN specialists, speech and language therapists, educational psychologists or classroom teachers to make a difference. I protected the funding at the national level, and I now expect local authorities to deliver on it locally, as they are elected to do.

I could take further advice from my officials on that. I have no objection to sharing that detail with the committee, and I could provide that in written form following today’s session.

I am sorry to interrupt, convener, but Mr Dey might wish to come in on that point before we move on.

I agree with the sentiment behind Mr Adam’s question. I do not yet know whether there will be an announcement today about lifting the two-child cap, but we know that that would alleviate child poverty at the stroke of a pen. There are many actions that the UK Government could take and I hope that we will hear more about that today. Unless both our Governments work in unison to tackle child poverty, it will not work. We know that the Scottish child payment has been a game changer in ensuring that Scotland’s child poverty levels stay lower than those in other parts of the United Kingdom, but we must see a concerted effort across these islands and must be able to work with the UK Government, so I really hope that we will see more progress from the UK Government to that end today.