Chamber and committees

Ah, right—okay. Regarding leavers’ destinations more broadly, some of the challenge relates to the pandemic generation, and we have talked about some of the impacts in that regard. How we measure what success looks like is a broader challenge.

In its report, the committee highlighted the disconnect between the aspirations that are set out in the national improvement framework and the stretch aims. That challenge is partly borne out by the fact that today’s broad educational offer looks totally to different to when you and I were at school, and lots of different qualifications are delivered. At the current time, I am not clear—headteachers will probably agree with this—that we are gathering the totality of achievements in all our measurements.

Some of that is quite unhelpful for the full story. Last week, on the radio, Mr Briggs received a bit of pushback on that from a headteacher, who said, “If you look narrowly at one measure, what you are saying is right, but actually, you need to look at the totality of achievements”. Historically, we had a cohort of young people who left school with no awards or qualifications. Nowadays, they are more likely to have national progression awards or national 3 qualifications and be supported to achieve and go on to a positive destination as a result.

Therefore, the gap is in part due to our measurements—you might have a view on that. Local government has a view on it, and it uses the measurements that are set out in the stretch aims. Officials will correct me if I am wrong, because it is a long time since I looked at this, but it does that because Insight, which is the tool that is used by headteachers and school staff, looks at the totally of qualifications across the piece. It presents a truer story in terms of the full picture of destinations.

I am comfortable, convener, because, if I do not move now, we will not have an operational board to fulfil the functions of the new body. There is a requirement on me, on which I have been advised by my officials, to move forward on that—to have the board ready to operate.

It is worth saying that, if the motion on the order is not agreed to today, it will not be possible to start making regulated board appointments to qualifications Scotland before its establishment. It is hugely important that that body has a working board that is ready from day 1 to undertake the work that we expect it to do.

Such matters will be discussed in relation to the amendments that are lodged. As I have made clear to the convener, we will look to engage with committee members across the Parliament on that basis.

In my opening remarks I spoke about a number of board appointments—five were made late last year. I referred to Ms Rogers as the new chair, but I accept the convener’s point that she was appointed in December 2023 and so is perhaps not so “new” any more. Fresh leadership was brought in at that time, and we will look at further appointments as part of the upcoming recruitment process.

Along with the chair, the five people who were appointed in November will transition.

And this—

We would have to reflect on that, and I would have to take advice on an alternative recruitment process.

I do not have anything further to add to Nico McKenzie-Juetten’s comments on that aspect.

I heard what Miles Briggs asked about stage 3—Pam Duncan-Glancy made that point earlier. I go back to Clare Hicks’s point that we would not seek to begin the recruitment round until we had certainty on any such amendments, because we would not be able to make appointments to a board without listening to the Parliament in relation to the amendments that the Government will accept. We have to reflect that in the recruitment process, but my concern as cabinet secretary is that if we sit still—this is predicated on the advice that my officials have given me—we risk not having board appointments in place for the new operational qualifications Scotland. I do not think that that will be credible to Scotland’s teachers or to pupils and their parents. It is therefore imperative that we have the board appointments in place.

I do not accept the assertion that Mr Briggs made in his final point. Of course, purely on the basis of the numbers, in a Parliament of minorities, the Government must listen to the views of Opposition parties. However, I want to have cross-party support for the bill, because that will strengthen the way in which our qualifications offer works. I have met Mr Briggs privately and I have met other members of the committee to talk about their interests in relation to amendments. I am very keen to deliver on that.

Again, I go back to the inherent risk of our not agreeing the order today, which would in essence mean a delay to the board appointment process. That concerns me, because the legislation is key to delivering all that the Parliament has asked the Government to deliver on on education reform. We can sit still if that is the committee’s view as to what we should do, but it will delay the process and there is inherent risk in that approach. It is, of course, a matter for the committee to decide on.

I am not, but I will defer to Clare Hicks and Nico.