Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that those identified with dyslexia at school leave education with the appropriate supporting information needed to secure reasonable adjustments in the workplace. (S6O-04668)

Some time has passed since November, and there is frustration in the dyslexia community about how long it is taking to progress some of the proposals and about the fact that, after years of asking, the Scottish Government still has not identified a lead official for adult dyslexia. Will the cabinet secretary look into that?

I thank the minister for that intervention, but when I hear her talking, what I hear is a dialling back of what Liz Smith is proposing. Liz Smith is probably too polite and too focused on trying to get something done to say this, but what I hear is a talking down of the ambition that is at the heart of the proposals.

I have had the wise counsel of Liz Smith over many years. When we were both on the Education and Skills Committee, Iain Gray used to say that she was more like my headteacher than a colleague. I have not always been very good at finding common ground, but Liz Smith has always been searching for that, looking for solutions and looking to put party politics to one side. To be honest, given that she is someone who operates and works like that in this Parliament, it is pretty disgraceful that the best treatment was to receive an 11th-hour letter at 6 o’clock after decision time yesterday, and that there was no chance for the minister to have better engagement before that—particularly when she says that she has met the member in charge of the bill.

I find that frustrating because the bill speaks to a philosophy and a vision that is about making our country better and shaking up how we do things, rather than doing what is easy. I say that because, based on the debate so far, we are having a clash on how to make it happen. Liz Smith has not shied away from the fact that this is not an easy bill—it is not a secret. It is not a £40 million carriage clock that ticks a few boxes and gets the member some legislation in her name. Easier bills might have been available, but Liz Smith believes passionately in it and has convinced many people that it is worth doing.

In that context, we should look at why someone with an education background who is very passionate on the topic believes that this is the right way to spend such a sum of money and that the results will come.

I agree with that; I was going to come to it later. Personally, I have always been a sceptic when it comes to the curriculum for excellence—that is not a secret. I am a passionate believer in a knowledge-based curriculum, and I would like to see something that is more structured and more prescriptive. However, even I have been convinced that this is the right way to go and that there has to be some balance.

We cannot listen to the testimony of the young people—including the young person mentioned by Liz Smith—and not recognise that there is something transformational about outdoor education that goes beyond what can be done in the classroom and goes right to the heart of social justice. I cannot believe that the Scottish National Party Government does not recognise what is at stake here. It is hard to accept the idea that accessing Scotland’s great outdoors is something for privileged young people, whether through a postcode lottery or a lottery of birth, and to hear pushback that it should not be universal. That is really sad. That speaks to a narrowness, a smallness and a lack of determination, which probably also speaks to the wider failings in our education system.

What makes this initiative exciting is the intensity of the experience and the chance to take everyone out of their comfort zones. That is where the transformational and lasting effects come into their own.

We talk about outdoor learning, but in most education settings, people are just playing at outdoor learning. It is not serious and it is not real. To be honest, as a result, a lot of what is done ends up being a waste of valuable time and resources. We need specialist and quality provision, and we need it to be available for all.

As a member who represents a rural constituency, where the great outdoors is not that far away, I find it incredibly sad that, for many young people who go to school in my constituency, the chance of going on a residential trip or getting that experience feels beyond their reach. Because of change in society—whether that is looking at screens or changes to land-based occupations—their connections to the countryside and the outdoors in general are very limited.

We live in a great country. Why are we not determined to make sure that every young person in Scotland enjoys it and benefits from the experience? It is not good enough. Today, we have a chance to do something daring and different and—for once, unusually—to unite and do something that will make a tangible difference.

Will John Mason take an intervention?

Does the minister see that there are fewer residential opportunities now than there were 10, 15 or 20 years ago? Despite what she is saying, residential opportunities in most parts of Scotland are diminishing.

Will the member take an intervention?

I associate myself with all the tributes to Christina McKelvie. I know how deeply she will be missed, and my thoughts and prayers are with Keith Brown and her whole family.

Yesterday, community councils across my constituency received a notification from Police Scotland that officers will no longer attend their meetings, given the rising and competing demands and challenges on policing. That move will negatively impact local democracy and, worryingly, the decision has been taken without any community consultation. It follows a similar move when local event organisers were told that long-standing police involvement in community events was no longer guaranteed, due to pressure on police resources.

Does the First Minister share my concern that vital links between the police and the communities that they serve are being eroded under the Police Scotland model? Does he recognise that the imposition of a Police Scotland central-belt policing culture is increasingly damaging public confidence and the good work of dedicated local police officers?

With just a year to go until dissolution and my own eyes fixed on the exit, I rise to speak in the debate with a slightly different mindset. I look back at the years spent in the chamber and question—not in a way that is disrespectful to colleagues—how much of what we have done has actually delivered a meaningful step change in the future lives of Scotland’s young people. What have we actually done to shift the dial? What will people reel off in future as the key successes of this parliamentary session?

When I hear the minister talk about affordability, I find it very frustrating, because I have lost track of how many times I have heard the First Minister say that we cannot just will the ends—we have to will the means. When we say that the provision is unaffordable and unworkable, when we fish around trying to find all the problems and none of the solutions, what are we telling young people?

Processing planning applications takes up significant resources, especially for smaller rural authorities. Despite those commitments on planning and development, net expenditure by local authorities was more than 30 per cent lower in 2023-24 than it was in 2013-14. We do not have to look very far to find damaging delays that are holding back growth, particularly in the rural economy. What work is the minister doing to review the work of local authorities and ensure that there is consistency across Scotland?