On the first point that you have put to me, I accept that the slight widening of levels 4, 5 and 6 in the most recent data set is a challenge. However, it is important to look at the totality of progress that has been made across the piece, which is the point that I made to Mr Rennie.

Some of the challenge is that the NIF measurement is not in the same place as the stretch aims, so it is not gathering the totality of qualifications. The point that was made to Mr Briggs on the radio last week was that, if we only look at the narrow data set, we will miss all the other qualifications that our young people are achieving. It is, therefore, more important that we move to a truer story about the totality of qualifications in the round. However, I accept that the figures for this year are not where they should be, and we need to reset and focus on progress. Today, you have heard about some of the actions that are being taken to that end.

If you look in the round at the broader qualifications set, which is not captured by the NIF, you will see a range of other qualifications. I am more than happy to share information on that, because it has been raised with me by School Leaders Scotland and the BOCSH group of headteachers. They pointed to the fact that the Government’s measurements are not telling an accurate story of the totality of our young people’s achievements. It causes me great concern that we are out of sync when gathering data to measure that progress. We cannot have the scenario that you have outlined, because it is not going to help young people with their educational progress.

As we have heard across the piece from my officials and from David Gregory from Education Scotland—who I see is leaning in—a number of the recommendations in the 2022 report were for local government. I observe that local government is not at the table today—that is within the committee’s gift—but we need local government to be part of the answer, which is why the education assurance board is important. Alison Taylor’s points about variance are also really key. There is variance across the country—it is not a flat picture in relation to the numbers that Ms Duncan-Glancy outlined. Some areas are better than others, even when extrapolating with regard to poverty, which causes me concern, so it is really important that there is targeted support.

Dave Gregory’s team is involved at the national level in the targeted support to authorities, particularly on the measurements that Ms Duncan-Glancy spoke about, so I will bring him in to talk about that.

Is the issue the availability of subjects?

Would you like Mr Gregory to come in on that?

We will then have parity across the group.

I am happy to do so.

That is an interesting point that links to Mr Briggs’s comment about health. I think that, when I did my teacher training at Clydebank high school, we had campus cops in 2007. I am trying to remember how they were funded. They were obviously not funded from SAC, but I do not know what the budget line was at the time.

I know that Mr Greer has strong views about headteachers using PEF for campus cops, but some of them will have contrary views and they are empowered to choose to bring in such interventions.

I do not think that we have an explicit measurement in relation to income groupings. I set out some progress in relation to positive destinations, and we have seen progress in our primary schools, but I would like faster progress—it needs to happen at pace. However, we cannot ignore the context that you highlight, Mr Kidd, with regard to the pandemic.

When we talk about the Scottish attainment challenge, we consider school education in Scotland quite narrowly. However, I draw members’ attention to the gaps that are already emerging among our youngest children. There are speech and language delays among zero to two-year-olds in some of our poorest communities. We track that data in terms of educational performance. We know that the outcomes for those young people, who were not necessarily exposed to health visitors during lockdown in the same way that they might have been otherwise, are being impacted as a result, so we need to think again about how we provide them with support to drive progress.

I am sorry—I see that Alison Taylor wants to come in.

I responded to Alexander Stewart’s members’ business debate yesterday evening—some members of the committee were there, although I do not think that Ms Duncan-Glancy was. In that debate, I gave an update on the Government’s response, which is—as I said in responding to a point about the Audit Scotland report—that I want to engage with the Auditor General on that. We need to provide a substantive response to that report, including on the recommendation that the member referred to.

The member spoke about ASN in relation to spend. More broadly—again, I put this on the record in the debate last night—we see an improving picture in relation to the attainment of children with an identified additional support need. We know that, historically, many of those young people were prevented from attaining in the ways that they should have done because of the way in which our school system was structured, which often excluded them from mainstream education.

We have an inclusive education system. There was some challenge to that last night from Conservative members with regard to the presumption of mainstreaming—Ms Duncan-Glancy will have her own views on that—but I think that that is the strength of our education system in Scotland. The national discussion on education, the results of which were published in 2023 in “All Learners in Scotland Matter—national discussion on education: final report”, welcomed that as being unique to the Scottish education system. However, the challenge is always about delivery, and that is another point that came out in the debate last night.

National policy and local implementation are parts of all that I do as education secretary, whether it be on teacher numbers, ASN or responding to mental health challenges. This week, I answered a parliamentary question on that, which the member might be interested in. I cannot recall which member of the Education, Children and Young People Committee asked the question—it night have been Mr Briggs—but the response lays out additional support for learning spend per local authority. I encourage you to interrogate that data, because spending per pupil varies across the country.

I can protect ASN spend at the national level, but there is a level of local political decision making on how the funding gets to those who need it most, which is cited as a challenge in the Audit Scotland report.

The other challenge is transparency, which is why I welcome the report. I would like greater transparency in spend. I can talk about the record £1 billion of investment that is going to ASN, but we need to track how that spend is getting to those who need it most.