Meeting of the Parliament (Hybrid)

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 22, 2020

Official Report 981KB pdf

---

Residential Outdoor Centres

The final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S5M-22652, in the name of Liz Smith, on residential outdoor centres. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament is concerned by the financial plight of Scotland’s outdoor centres and the threats of closure; considers that school residential trips enrich the lives of children and young people and that such experiences have been a feature of Scottish education for 80 years: welcomes the current public petition to save Scottish residential outdoor centres, and encourages support for this.

17:05  

I thank all the members who signed the motion and all those who will contribute to this evening’s debate.

I open the debate with two personal experiences in mind. First, during my teaching days in the 1980s and 1990s I was privileged to take charge of several outdoor education projects in Scotland. Secondly, over my 13 years as a member of the Scottish Parliament, I have been privileged to receive many emails that have told me just how much constituents have valued the opportunities that outdoor education has given to their families.

The value to families is surely exemplified by the fact that around 19,000 people have signed the “Save Scottish Outdoor Centres” petition, by the fact that when the Scout Association advertised on Facebook on 15 September that 144 places were available in outdoor activities, the places were gone within just a few minutes, by the fact that the Outward Bound Trust offer in August of 800 adventure days at Loch Eil and Ullswater was also taken up within a few hours, and by the considerable media interest in the issue over the past few days from the BBC, STV and Channel 5.

The popular appeal of outdoor education comes as no surprise to me. Before my first residential trip, when I was 15, I remember being anxious about being away from home for the first time, about not really knowing many people in the group, including the two members of staff who would be looking after us, and about not knowing what to expect in a remote environment, far removed from anything with which I was familiar.

When I returned, the anxieties with which I had started out had been completely defeated and replaced with a new mood of confidence and self-discipline and a much deeper understanding of who I was. I could cook, put up a tent, build a campfire, fish, and walk and climb the hills for hours on end. More important, I had learned what it means to be part of a team, I had learned about leadership and I had learned the value of friendship.

I did not know it at the time, but those two weeks are responsible for my lifetime of enjoyment of and commitment to the outdoors. In bringing this debate to the Parliament, I want to ensure that the opportunities that I was afforded will still be there for generations to come.

The evidence of the benefits of outdoor education is widespread and compelling. I pay tribute to all individuals in the outdoor education sector who have enriched the lives of our young people, providing them with a knowledge and appreciation of environments and communities that are very different from those with which they are familiar, building their confidence and self-esteem and developing in them an understanding of responsible behaviour and how to deal with new challenges and manage risk.

In an age—particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic—when there is growing concern about young people’s health and lifestyles, concern that many young people from deprived areas, in particular, do not get the same opportunities as their counterparts elsewhere, and concern that in some local authorities the feeling is that there is a need to cut back on such activity because of stringent financial circumstances, it is time to treasure our outdoor education centres in the same way as we treasure our schools.

As the circumstances stand just now, it is predicted that half—I repeat, half—of our 36 outdoor centres are likely to close by autumn 2021. If they do, they will likely not return. We simply cannot allow that to happen. Every single outdoor group to whom I have spoken over the past two weeks—I am grateful to them all—has told me that we must act now if we are to save our outdoor education centres.

That is an extremely blunt warning, but when we see the details of the financial situation that faces many centres, in local authorities of every political hue, we realise just how desperate the situation is.

The situation is especially bad in some of the most rural and remote locations, which in many cases have not been able to benefit from single days of outdoor education.

Nor is it just land-based outdoor education centres that are at risk. Ocean Youth Trust Scotland, which provides a floating outdoor education centre and which has, in the past 20 years, looked after 14,000 young people, many of them with specific challenges, has not been able to sail any boats at all this year. We know that schools are finding it particularly difficult to afford the necessary coach hire or the fees that are required for specialist assistance, whether that be for activities such as canoeing, rock-climbing or abseiling.

In August, the Scottish Government advised local authorities that residential school trips should not take place, and that that decision will not be reviewed until December at the earliest. That is a hammer blow. It will mean £2.3 million of lost income for the Scouts alone. At the Scottish Outdoor Education Centres charity, 50 jobs are at stake, despite the fact that its centres have received enquiries for 2021 bookings that make up almost £0.5 million of income.

With the current growth in Covid-19 and the on-going uncertainty, the SOEC can see that schools and local authorities will be unlikely to send youngsters to outdoor education centres for the rest of this term and possibly for the spring term. This is a desperate plea from all of them for the collective will of Government, of Parliament and other institutions to help them to find the necessary funds to tide them over until next summer to prevent any closures because, I repeat, if those centres close, they will not open again.

In its 2007 Scottish Parliament election manifesto, the Scottish National Party said:

“Scotland has one of the most spectacular and challenging outdoor environments in the world and all of our youngsters should have the opportunity to experience it. We will work towards a guarantee of 5 days outdoor education for every school pupil. To start this process, we will provide an additional £250,000 each year to support the expansion of 5 days subsidised outdoor education targeted at children from our most deprived communities.”

I agreed with that, and I also agreed with John Swinney when said recently that he was

“keen to ensure that residential outdoor learning experiences continue to be part of the Curriculum for Excellence.”

I remind the Scottish Government that, as part of the 2009-10 Scottish budget negotiations, a £1 million commitment to outdoor education was made; it is there in the budget lines. It was supported by several Scottish sports stars at the time, led by Gavin Hastings, who wanted to see combined support from Government, business and philanthropy via the Trusts (Scotland) Act 1961, to ensure that all pupils had access to at least one week of residential outdoor education by the time they are 15. In 2008, the SOEC advised that that would probably cost around £160 per pupil, so I expect it will now be nearer £250. At the time, however, the outdoor centres told me that they never saw that money, so it is now surely time to refocus all our minds. This is not a party-political issue; this is for us all. We must urgently find the financial assistance to allow the outdoor education centres to remain. That is the purpose of the debate.

There is the additional Covid context to all this. If outdoor education is a priceless asset in normal circumstances, it was never more needed than now. We are all too aware of how many young people have struggled through this crisis, missing several months of school, feeling lonely and isolated in many cases, and generally feeling less sure about themselves and their abilities, with all the impact that that has for their mental health.

Parliament, whether in the chamber or in committee, is all too accustomed to debating the progress of education in numbers—the number of teachers, the number of Scottish Qualification Authority passes, the percentage increase in literacy and numeracy skills, class sizes—when, more often, we should be turning our attention to the qualitative aspects of education that cannot be reduced to numbers but which, I argue, are intrinsic to what can be defined as good quality education. I have no doubt whatsoever that education in an outdoor environment provides one of the most valuable and rewarding learning experiences for a wide range of pupils, no matter what their backgrounds or abilities. To lose that precious asset is an unconscionable thought, and I hope the Scottish Government hears the loud message that is coming from the sector: if we do not get action, the outdoor education centres will no longer exist. I urge the Scottish Government to work with us all to find the necessary funding and ensure that they remain.

We move to the open debate. We have lots of speakers so I ask members to stick to speeches of no more than four minutes. Bruce Crawford will be followed by Jamie Greene.

If you can hear me, Mr Crawford, just hold on a wee minute; we cannot hear you. You are silent.

17:15  

I am not now—for once I am not silent.

I am pleased to hear it. Would you like to start again?

Thank you. I welcome the debate, and thank Liz Smith for bringing it to the chamber. The outdoor facilities under discussion have formed a small but important part of the life of my family. That is because I am father to three boys—now grown men—who benefited from the unique experience of outdoor residential centres.

I probably deserve some sort of medal for taking each of my sons, separately, to Fordell Firs in Fife for the father-and-son cub camp weekend. For those not familiar with it, Fordell Firs is an excellent cub and scout adventure centre. I have to admit that, no matter how many times I was there, the rope ladders and vertical climbing challenges were just as scary.

I am a big believer in those types of activities for young people. They help to build confidence, interpersonal skills and general resilience. They also support an appreciation of the natural world, often giving young people a chance to learn about different plant species and wild animals. They take young people away from video games, which is not a criticism of video games—they too serve an important purpose—but it is good to find a balance in our great outdoors. I think that we all agree that that can so easily be lost. The range of activities on offer is often mapped to the outcomes sought through the curriculum for excellence, demonstrating pretty effectively that learning can be fun.

In my constituency, we have the spectacular Aberfoyle setting that is home to Dounans outdoor education centre at the heart of the Loch Lomond and Trossachs national park area. I have visited the site a number of times, most recently last year for an update on some of the developments that they have been working on. The centre can now accommodate more than 150 people in three excellent cedarwood chalets.

The groups of young people who are lucky enough to visit such an outdoor education centre get a very wide range of outdoor experiences to enjoy and learn from. It is a truly exciting and memorable place, and one that I hope will continue to offer such a unique experience for many generations to come. That will be particularly true post Covid, when as a nation we seek to help heal any wounds in our young people.

Before the debate, I was contacted by a number of organisations including the #SaveYourOutdoorCentres campaign, who pointed to the financial difficulties that residential centres have. I also received a detailed briefing from Scouts Scotland, who have put a fair amount of work into advising on the guidance for reopening such facilities. I, too, am disappointed that it is not yet deemed safe to open such residential facilities. However, I accept the role of scientific advisers in that process, with the absolute priority being to protect public health.

The motion that we are debating points to a petition that is looking to the Scottish ministers to provide financial support for outdoor residential centres and I know that the Scottish Government will do what it can in that regard. Beyond party politics, I do not generally find a lot to disagree with Liz Smith about—she is a member of this place for whom I have a lot of respect. However, like others, Liz Smith is well aware that the Covid crisis has meant that unprecedented amounts of funding have had to be pumped into our national health service and the economy.

Much of the money that has been committed has come from United Kingdom state borrowing—a power that, unfortunately, Holyrood does not yet have. I hope that Liz Smith and other members will recognise that the reality of the devolved financial restrictions means that, in all likelihood, any additional support may also require to flow from the Treasury. I am fully on board with finding solutions to support these important centres, but we need to be serious and realistic about what the solutions are to be.

17:19  

I thank Liz Smith for bringing the debate to the chamber. When she said that she had secured a members’ business debate, I was proactively pleased about participating in it, not least because of my education brief, but also because residential outdoor centres are important in my region. We will hear about the important role that those centres play in young people’s lives and I hope that they will continue to play that role in the future, but that is seriously at risk.

Outdoor learning goes far beyond what can be taught in a physical classroom. Residential outdoor centres take children away from their Instagram accounts and their PlayStations and stick them in environments in which they have to reconnect with nature and the great outdoors and—more important—in which they reconnect with each other. Friendships are made, new skills are acquired, self-confidence is boosted and lessons are learned that may last a lifetime. There is no end to the benefits.

If and when we come out of lockdown and life becomes normal, education centres will have a massive role to play in young people’s lives—but only if they exist. We know that, as Bruce Crawford said, coronavirus has had an impact on things, but its physical impact is nothing like the mental impact that it is having on young people who, in my view, have been disproportionately affected. The vast majority of young people have seen their mental health challenged by feelings of social isolation and loneliness. It is okay to sit in front of a computer game, but there needs to be interaction with other human beings, not least at that age. The great outdoors provides much-needed clarity of mind, fresh air and good, old-fashioned exposure to the elements, and that is not always achievable on a day trip. That highlights the importance of residential stays.

I accept that the unavoidable restrictions of late have, for obvious reasons, rendered many of those places of learning out of bounds, but that is financially insufferable for them.

I am privileged to have a number of excellent outdoor education centres in my region. Those centres give children—particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds on the mainland—valuable experiences. There are two outdoor centres on the Isle of Arran alone: the Lochranza outdoor education and activity centre, which has been around for over 45 years, and the Arran outdoor centre in Lamlash. In Dalry, on the mainland, there is the Blair activity centre, which is a Girlguiding centre in the heart of Ayrshire that has made an immeasurable contribution to the lives of many thousands of young girls. Just north of Helensburgh is the Blairvadach outdoor education centre, which is nearly 50 years old.

Let us not beat about the bush: the centres are in dire straits. They are heavily reliant on residential visits for a huge proportion of their income, and they are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They are being told on the one hand that residential trips cannot resume until at least spring next year; on the other hand, they are being denied the full financial support that they need to guarantee their existence. Without support, wherever it comes from—we can debate that—those fantastic centres will be lost for ever. As Liz Smith said, we have heard from the industry that as many as half of the centres could close. That is not just a warning; it is a prediction.

The issue is not as simple as just extending one measure of support, such as the job retention scheme. As important as such schemes are, the costs of keeping a centre running go far beyond such support. As is the case with any business, running costs are about more than just people costs.

As we know, beyond outdoor learning centres, the scouts and Girlguiding services are under threat. They face the most serious challenge in their history. We have already seen the first casualties of that; I hope that they are not a sign of things to come. We cannot in good conscience let that happen.

I urge the Scottish Government to listen. We are not talking about a hobby or fringe or extra-curricular activity; we are talking about mainstream education. It is a vital cog in the wheel of attainment, health and broadening the mind. Once the centres are gone, they are gone. That would be a terrible shame on us all. Let us not make that happen.

17:24  

I echo the thanks to Liz Smith for securing the debate. The issue is a crucial one that will affect our ability to educate our young people in a fundamental sense.

At the start of the previous century, there was a transformation in thinking about the outdoors as it relates to education. Kurt Hahn and others led the way in arguing that the outdoors should not be something extra to education but should be core; that, by learning about the outdoors, one learns about resilience; and that—this is important—by learning about how to live in the outdoors, one gains a more holistic sense of learning than one does by merely learning in the classroom.

A hundred years later, it was a bold and important move to include those understandings in the curriculum for excellence, as Bruce Crawford stated. We may use different language from the words and phrases that were used by people 100 years ago, but the ideas of breadth and holistic learning are very much embedded in curriculum for excellence.

Outdoor learning should no longer be regarded as extracurricular but should be seen as core to the curriculum. The irony, given that we have only recently made that step forward and embedded the understandings that outdoor education is essential to learning and not peripheral to it, is that we now find that outdoor education and outdoor education centres are under threat.

The benefits of residential outdoor education are important to emphasise, and Liz Smith brought those to life in her remarks. We have all experienced the richness of learning through camping trips and hiking in the hills. It is through the application of knowledge of the outdoors that we learn a much broader set of skills—true life skills. Indeed, we now know the important role that being outdoors and learning about the outdoors have in mental health.

Critically, the curriculum for excellence says that there should be mixed provision and that outdoor education should not simply be provided by schools. That is why the crisis that the organisations face, with the potential loss of outdoor centres, is such a serious issue in terms of our ability to deliver outdoor education as a whole.

Let us be clear: this crisis is pronounced and it is serious. Some of the organisations are saying that facing another six months, let alone another 12 months of restrictions will cause them to be in crisis, leading to the loss of assets that have taken decades to build up.

The consequences are stark. We will lose skills. Staff are already being consulted about redundancy. Organisations are looking at closing centres in order to meet the costs that they have been unable to avoid through the months of lockdown.

Let us also be clear that the Scottish Government’s interventions have fallen short. I understand what Bruce Crawford said in his remarks—limitless finances are not available. However, let us also be clear that the third sector resilience fund fell short when it came to outdoor education organisations. When they made their applications, they were told that they did not qualify. We need the Scottish Government urgently either to look again at extending the schemes, or to come up with new schemes to provide the support that the organisations need, because, as Liz Smith put it, if we lose them, we will lose them for ever.

17:28  

I, too, thank my colleague Liz Smith for leading the debate and for bringing it to the chamber. I join her in recognising the urgent challenges facing the sector, which have been well highlighted so far, particularly by the on-going public campaign. Residential outdoor activity centres have long been a vibrant feature of Scotland’s education system and an important jewel in the crown, but the pressures of the pandemic have reduced many of the centres to a precarious and fast-diminishing existence.

The rich experiences and skills gained through outdoor learning go far beyond the classroom. Young people learn to harness emotional, social and employability skills that they can use for a lifetime.

I am speaking as a former student of the Outward Bound Trust in Moray, an area that is known well to my colleague on my right, Edward Mountain. When I was a young lad, I was a general apprentice for J & P Coats and worked at its mills in Paisley. During that time, I spent four weeks at the Outward Bound school. Part of that organisation’s programme was to build our character. Every one of us—all 50 apprentices—were sent to the various schools around the United Kingdom. I drew the short straw. I was due to attend in May, but I was asked if I would go in January. If anyone knows what it is like in Burghead in January, they know exactly what one has to put up with. Nevertheless, I had a wonderful time.

I have memories of arriving at Elgin station, where I was met by the lorry from the Outward Bound Trust; of the last pint of beer being consumed before we left the station; and of the last cigarette going out the back of the truck. I was then confronted by a bunch of my team, who were police cadets, building site apprentices, young people in care, Royal Air Force cadets and more. Many members have already spoken about the life-changing opportunities that outdoor education provides, and, for me, it was a vital spark that helped to light my love of the environment, which continues now with my own children and their experiences. The value of such an offering in outdoor education cannot be overstated, but nor can the scale of the threat that the organisations that provide those services face.

The activities that we had were sailing in the Moray Firth, after breaking the ice in Hopeman harbour. There was running from Burghead to Hopeman, followed by diving into the pool at Gordonstoun to do our personal survival activities. There was rock climbing and abseiling, and we had debates and discussions in the evenings. That experience has stood me in extremely good stead throughout my career. I still think back to those days and the friends I made.

Ten years later, as a factory manager in Glasgow at our family’s drinks company, I sent one of our young managers on that very course. In those days, it was in Loch Eil. He went out a boy and came back a man—it was tremendous. There is a lot to be gained from such experiences.

The sea cadets, the army cadets and the air force cadets are close to my heart. We incorporate in our training two week-long camps per year. Those residential camps are crucial to the cadets’ development. We are lucky that we manage to fund that through our other means.

Under the current guidelines, the outdoor centres, which stand independently, can provide only day trips, but the lack of cost provision from schools and parents, coupled with the practicalities that are involved in organising travel to rural spots, has limited the uptake considerably. In any case, most centres are heavily dependent on residential visits for their income, which day trips alone are unable to provide.

Like Jamie Greene, I represent the region of West Scotland, which is home to quite a few of Scotland’s residential activity centres. One of them is Ocean Youth Trust Scotland, based in Greenock, which Liz Smith mentioned. It is a fantastic operation, and its voyages are really worth while going on. In the past, I considered sending one of my daughters on one of those to serve before the mast—seriously, she would have had a good time.

Ardmay House near Arrochar has provided residential activities for up to 2,500 children each year since it opened in 2003. However, like many other activity centres, Ardmay House has experienced the catastrophic impact on its business of the current situation. Unfortunately, it is not a rare case. The charity Children 1st drew my attention to another centre at Ardroy, which helps young people who are affected by mental health challenges, and their families, and supports children in their recovery from traumatic experiences.

Covid-19 has called for staff to be innovative and creative in how they deliver their services. The best alternative to keeping the sector running is to redeploy staff to work directly with schools and local authorities to deliver outdoor learning and to equip teachers to do the same, but that can be done only with financial assistance. The provision of such support is necessary to enable the sector not just to survive the current crisis, but to actively thrive.

Jamie Greene mentioned the outstanding Blairvadach outdoor centre, which is close to my home in Helensburgh. Fortunately, we managed to save it from closure by Glasgow City Council. I am glad that there was cross-party support for allowing it to continue its work. The team at Blairvadach worked to deliver outdoor learning to hub schools in Glasgow and has gone on to develop residential provision. Another prime example is the scouts centre at Lochgoilhead.

Efforts are being made to stop the closure of such outdoor residential centres by seeking help from the Government. I am being reminded to conclude. It is clear that financial support from the Scottish Government would be life-saving for the sector. I speak from personal experience when I say that we must not throw out the jewel in the crown. I have the experience of the Outward Bound Trust to my name.

Thank you, Mr Corry. I am glad that it was only four weeks that you were there for; otherwise we might have been here a lot longer.

17:33  

I warmly welcome the debate and thank Liz Smith for securing it. Perhaps it represents a timely bridge between her previous portfolio responsibility for education and her new role as environment spokesperson, to which I welcome her.

The huge outpouring of support for Scotland’s outdoor education centres and their staff in recent weeks should not surprise any of us. The permanent closure of the Ardeonaig centre near Killin came as a huge blow to schools that were planning to take their pupils there this year. Other centres such as the Belmont centre in Strathmore valley or the Dounans centre near Aberfoyle have not yet reached that point of crisis, but they and many others are struggling, and people are genuinely worried about the future.

At the moment, many centres are working hard to move to alternative, non-residential models, to ensure that some form of nature-based education can continue during the Covid crisis. That work will need the strongest level of support from both Government and councils to keep the outdoor education workforce working together over the next year. However, from speaking to many people in the sector, it is also clear that, without funding to effectively mothball centres in the short term, there is a serious risk that operators may be forced to offload buildings, centres and other facilities. Members will be aware that many of those buildings have long histories—they were often donated, and their resources built up through decades of fundraising and sweat equity. The cost of setting up those centres from scratch in 2020 would be absolutely astronomical, and run to millions and millions of pounds. Therefore, as well as providing support to deliver alternative models of education in the short term, funds must be put in place to mothball our outdoor centres for that period. That would ensure that providers are not forced into a position in which they need to sell their assets, they can maintain facilities for outdoor education to resume once the pandemic has passed, and residential visits can be confidently resumed again in full. I am talking about the need for thousands of pounds for staffing support, utilities and minor repairs, rather than the millions of pounds that would be needed to start from scratch and rebuild centres that have closed or been sold off.

It is clear that the centres cannot be lost—if that happened, outdoor education would be devastated. Each centre is as integral a part of the education estate as a school building. We do not take decisions to close schools lightly; therefore, we should not allow these centres to close by an unforeseen circumstance.

As part of a green, education-led recovery out of the Covid crisis, the opportunity for young people to discover the outdoors, and themselves again, could not be more important and vital for their future. If we do not act now, that opportunity will be lost to the generations who absolutely need it most. We need to act and save our outdoor centres.

17:37  

I thank Liz Smith for allowing the debate to take place. From our time together on the Education and Skills Committee, I know that she has been a long-time and passionate advocate for the outdoor education sector. I thank her for giving Parliament the opportunity to highlight—as many members have done already, and as the motion does—the significant contribution that outdoor centres make to enriching the lives and educational experience of children and young people across Scotland. It is also an opportunity to underscore the serious and legitimate public concern over the future of such centres, many of which face the prospect of closure in the absence of further Government support and an ability to operate. We simply cannot afford to let that happen.

On a personal level, I declare an interest: I benefited hugely from access to outdoor education, as did both my sons, although maybe not to the same extent as Maurice Corry, given the more temperate climate. Growing up in Orkney, some might see that as inevitable, but doing so would be to underestimate the part that is played by teachers, youth workers, volunteers and others working in the sector. Bringing outdoor education alive to inform, engage and enthuse takes skill, understanding and commitment.

In my constituency, the outdoor centre in Hoy has come a long way since I stayed in its rather more basic predecessor hostel back in the 1980s. However, unchanged is the impact that trips to such centres can and do have on a child or young person’s sense of themselves, their self-confidence, and their ability to work as part of a team or on their own initiative.

We underestimate at our cost the life lessons and skills that can be gained from kayaking, bouldering, rock climbing or sitting round the camp fire, telling stories. Those benefits are tangible, they can be measured, and, as Daniel Johnson, Liz Smith and others have said, they fit effortlessly with the principles of curriculum for excellence, as well as other key objectives that ministers claim are important to the Government.

As a guiding ambassador, I fully endorse the arguments that Girlguiding Scotland made in its briefing on the role of outdoor learning in addressing gaps in attainment and helping to improve mental health and wellbeing at a time when Covid restrictions are taking their toll. Girlguiding Scotland argues that

“having access to nature and green spaces, the chance to try something new and make life long memories with their peers help to rebuild children and young people’s confidence and resilience”.

A few minutes talking to those who are fortunate enough to have attended the guide cottage in Orphir in my constituency will be left in no doubt about that. Children 1st also picks up on that theme in its briefing, which is informed by its work with some of the most vulnerable children and young people in our country.

Outdoor education has faced challenges for a number of years. The fact that we have now reached crisis point at precisely the moment when outdoor centres should be coming into their own is the cruellest of ironies. The asks from the sector are clear, specific and reasonable. We need direct support to outdoor centres to help with fixed costs and staff salaries, an increase in third sector resilience funding and a review of the blanket ban on residential trips. We also need to promote outdoor education sessions and day trips to teachers and schools. At a time when pre-school and nursery children are being encouraged down that route, we risk creating a cliff edge once they reach primary school as outdoor centres are forced to close their doors.

Ultimately, we need our outdoor centres and outdoor education. I thank Liz Smith for giving Parliament an opportunity to spell out that message and I urge the Government to respond positively and with urgency to the plight faced by this vital sector.

Quite a few more members would like to speak in the debate, so I am happy to accept a motion, under rule 8.14.3, that the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.

Motion moved,

That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[Liz Smith]

Motion agreed to.

I call Jeremy Balfour.

17:41  

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will not take up the full 30 minutes that you have just given us as an extension. [Laughter.]

As other members have done, I declare an interest because, as a child growing up, I benefited from going on school trips and from going to outdoor centres in the summer holidays. I learned to do lots of things that I perhaps would not have been able to do if I had stayed in Edinburgh. I want the same for future generations, including for my daughters. They are meant to be going in the spring for their first outdoor week with the school, but I suspect that that will be cancelled. However, we have to secure that for future generations.

The crux of the debate is the legacy that we will be left with after the virus. There is a real danger that we will end up with many fewer outdoor centres than we have at the moment, which will ultimately mean that fewer schoolchildren will be able to visit them, when we get back to some kind of normality. Inevitably, the children who come from more difficult backgrounds would probably be left behind, again. Therefore, we need to ensure that the legacy that we secure is that outdoor centres remain open and functioning in the decades ahead.

One danger that has not yet been picked up by other members is the short-term danger of losing the expertise of many of the staff who work in the centres. I am grateful to have had a number of conversations with centres over the past few days, and that subject was how they started; it was not about buildings or structures, but about what to do with the people who have the expertise in mountaineering, sailing, canoeing, skiing and so on. That expertise can go very quickly.

The expertise is not just in taking people rock climbing, canoeing and things such as Jeremy Balfour mentioned; it is also about dealing with children. That comes from years of experience of seeing people in certain situations. Is the member worried, as I am, that that expertise will be lost as well?

Mr Mountain has made a fair and good point. That expertise could disappear; staff might decide to go off and find jobs in other areas, so when centres reopen, as we hope they will, their expertise will no longer be available. We can debate what should happen and who should pay for it, but we must ensure that when centres reopen, staff are there to look after children and give them the experience that Mr Mountain described.

I have a second ask of the Government. I understand that it is difficult, if not impossible, to resume residential activity at the moment. However, many centres can offer day trips and activities to schools and young people. The Scottish Government has issued guidelines for local authorities, but I understand from conversations with the sector that local authorities are simply ignoring the guidelines or are making it too difficult for schools to arrange outdoor activities.

When the minister reflects on tonight’s debate, will he consider the guidance and his conversations with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and local authorities, with a view to keeping centres going, even if they can offer only day trips at the moment? That would protect the sector. Yes—it would cost money. The minister and other members of the Government say that Opposition members are always asking for more money. However, in this case, we need to find the money in order to save centres’ legacy for future generations.

17:46  

I thank Liz Smith MSP for bringing the debate to Parliament and for her inspiring call to save our outdoor centres.

Scotland’s residential outdoor centres have been a key feature of Scottish education for well over 50 years, as we have heard from many members. They provide extremely valuable learning experiences for children and young people. The residential learning experience provides opportunities and benefits that simply cannot be secured in any other educational context or setting. Indeed, the experience can be life changing.

Concern has been expressed to the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland about long-term loss of outdoor educational opportunities for children, and the commissioner’s office has highlighted that outdoor education is an important part of a child’s right to education, as set out in articles 28 and 29 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Given the backdrop of wider job losses and rising inequality, it is disappointing that Parliament is having to talk about outdoor residential centre staff being under threat of redundancy by mid-2021, and 50 per cent of centres closing permanently if they do not get urgent support.

The Scottish Government’s guidance says that no residential trips can take place. With no overnight trips allowed, the main income stream of most outdoor centres has been cut off. Outdoor centres must be closed until March 2020 and will have little or no income, and I understand that there are no plans to review the position until January. That leaves the sector perilously underfunded.

In a normal year, 105,000 children in Scotland get the chance to experience a residential trip, through their schools. It is often said in Parliament that we want Scotland to be the best place to grow up, but the poverty-related attainment gap will have increased during lockdown. Outdoor education should be a vital tool in supporting people back into education.

I am a former teacher; I accompanied pupils on many trips. It is clear to me that such trips should form part of every pupil’s education. Children from both rural and urban areas can benefit greatly. For many, it is their first opportunity to experience staying away from home. That can be a scary prospect but, as we heard, children often come back at the end of the week reinvigorated and full of confidence.

For some children from urban areas, such trips are their only opportunity to visit the countryside, and children who have additional needs are able to build confidence and independence outwith their normal school environment. Scottish Outdoor Education Centres reports that children develop a wide range of qualities and skills that can be applied in different settings and which enhance their future employability.

Outdoor centres such as Whithaugh Park in South Scotland, which I visited in 2014, provides children with an appreciation of the world around them. They learn skills that can be gained from the natural world.

I highlight the precious opportunity that outdoor centres provide for challenged groups. For several years, I joined the Scottish young carers festival at the Broomlee centre, near West Linton, where young carers were able to chill and share experiences with each other while having a lot of fun—they even created their own radio station.

Centres need support through the winter until they are able to open again. That would enable staff to be retained and to go into schools to support outdoor activities through the winter period. There are already bookings for next year, which means that centres can become self-sustaining again. I ask the Scottish Government to consider the possibility of working in partnership with schools and teachers in the meantime, and to provide greater guidance to local authorities on considering use of accommodation and assets through the winter.

Scottish Labour and I will continue to support outdoor education. I ask the Scottish Government to listen to the real concerns of the sector before it is too late. Many families have benefited from outdoor education through the years, so I encourage the whole country to get behind the #SaveYourOutdoorCentres campaign, as many have already, to show the strength of feeling that exists.

Our young people have faced many challenges as Scotland gets to grips with the global pandemic. We must be sure that, through the crisis, we do not risk the loss of children’s future outdoor education. The Scottish Government should step in to provide financial support through the winter for the outdoor education sector in Scotland.

17:51  

I thank Liz Smith for lodging the motion for debate. I disagree with very little of what she said, and I welcome the consensual and non-party-political manner in which she approached the subject.

The debate is very important. Although these are challenging times for everyone, and it is no surprise that residential outdoor centres are struggling, we need to look at the issue in the round. I know that the Government is committed to outdoor education; that was the case even before the pandemic hit.

Liz Smith made the point that Covid-19 has taught us that being outdoors has many benefits in relation to the virus and more generally. It is for the minister and the Government to look at what action to take, but it would be really good if we could find a way to support centres to ensure that they are still there when we come out the other side of the pandemic.

I thank Scouts Scotland for its briefing. I had a chat with Callum Holt, who, as well as being a director on its board, is a constituent of mine. He made clear the dire situation in which scouts and outdoor residential centres find themselves, and he was able to explain where they are. Having heard him, I know that there is a need for some form of support. We all understand the risks of young people going to residential gatherings just now, particularly in the light of the restrictions that have been set today, but other support might be required to ensure that outdoor centres are still there when we come out the other side, as I said earlier.

As other members are, I am a big supporter of outdoor residential education. During my childhood, I was in the Boys Brigade and had some great experiences. Although the Boys Brigade did not own any centres, it would hire them. One of my first visits was to Lanark. Coatbridge to Lanark is only, I think, 17 miles, but it seemed like such a big deal—it was amazing. I was lucky to have such experiences. My family also went camping. However, I know that a lot of young people, particularly in deprived areas, do not get such experiences, so it is important that we keep providing such opportunities.

I want to speak about my time as a social worker, particularly in relation to justice social work. Nothing impacted kids and young people more than when they were accepted on to outdoor programmes, such as those that are provided by the Outward Bound Trust. The programmes are absolutely fantastic. Young men, particularly those who have become involved in low-level offending behaviour, do the preparatory work to go away, and the trips can be life changing for them. I was a social worker who often had such casework, and it was always a real win if we were successful in getting a kid to go on one of the trips, because we knew about the impact that it could have. That is just one more reason why such resources are so valuable.

I will finish by mentioning Kilbowie outdoor centre—as members might expect from a North Lanarkshire MSP. Kilbowie benefited every kid in North Lanarkshire for a long time. Along with thousands of other people, I was bitterly disappointed in the recent decision to close it. That decision was taken before the pandemic. I had hoped that the early stages of the pandemic might have changed the council’s mind. Alas, the decision was made and, despite my having written to John Swinney, the centre is on a path of no return, which is a real shame. The council has said that it will set up something locally at Strathclyde park. As a local representative, I will hold the council to that promise. I pay tribute to my colleague Councillor Kirsten Larson, who fought against the decision. I just want to say to anybody who is watching out there that the Kilbowie building is still open to interested community bids for a set period. I really hope that something will come up.

I see that the Presiding Officer is asking me to stop, so I will close there.

You are all going a bit over the four minutes. I am worried that we are going to run out of time again.

17:56  

I add my congratulations to my colleague Liz Smith on securing time in the chamber for us to debate an incredibly important issue.

Glaisnock House, 1981, will forever remain tattooed on the inside of my head. It was a two-day O-level geology field trip that had us examining the igneous intrusion that is the Lugar sill, traipsing through the lead mines under the Lugar Hills while trying to scare the living daylights out of our teachers and classmates, surviving on about 10 minutes’ sleep in two nights, and being present in a classroom when the class was asked what the first living thing on earth was. A certain classmate, who shall remain nameless, stood up and declared that the first living thing on earth was a brontosaurus. Of course, the way my mind works, I just envisaged this empty world with nothing in it and then all of a sudden a 50-tonne brontosaurus appearing from thin air. That would have been something to behold.

Members might think that that story is a good reason not to allow pupils anywhere near a residential outdoor trip, but nearly 40 years later, one of the first topics that an old friend who I had not seen for many years and I spoke about was exactly that trip with much hilarity.

I have used the phrase “shared experiences” often in this place. Of course, we learned an awful lot in an environment that cannot be replicated in the classroom. That, of course, is the point. We need to afford our pupils as many learning opportunities as possible, including that experiential learning. We all learn and are inspired in different ways. Some can get it from a book and some can get it from listening to others but, without a doubt, the best way to learn is by experience.

The pandemic is understandably sucking the oxygen out of the room, and it is difficult to consider anything other what the next restrictions might be or how we can remain as safe as possible. However, we must recognise that there will be a time after Covid. In all the turmoil that we are working through, we must consider what we want our community to look like then.

Outdoor learning, especially in outdoor centres that are specifically set up to enhance the educational experience of our pupils, must be part of that, especially for those from less-well-off communities. Those are the pupils who are less likely to have such opportunities.

I managed to take my youngest away for a few days to one of those outdoor centres at Crieff, where we went swinging through the trees in the pouring rain and quad biking. The only downside for me was that the first person I bumped into there was Anas Sarwar.

My fear is that we are on a path that will lead to hugely reducing learning opportunities and that that will exacerbate inequalities. We must retain our residential outdoor centres as a matter of priority, because if we lose them, they will be next to impossible to replace, as others have said. In fact, I would go so far as to say that allowing pupils to look forward to a residential outdoor course could go a long way to tackle the anxiety that they will be feeling at the moment. It was a huge disappointment to my youngest and her classmates when they had to cancel their primary 7 trip to Lockerbie before the summer holidays. That is an experience that they will now never have had. My eldest had a hugely rewarding experience by going to work in Camp America and teaching Americans how to horseride.

I have spoken many times in the chamber about the attainment fund and using it to access the transport to outdoor learning centres. Covid has cost us so much, but we should ensure that there are opportunities for our children after the Covid crisis subsides that are similar to those personal experiences that most of us have talked about. It is important that outdoor centres are maintained for future generations.

18:01  

I echo the thanks to Liz Smith for bringing this incredibly important issue to the chamber.

The announcement today that the easing of lockdown has in many ways gone into reverse is a sobering reminder that Covid-19 has not gone away. Talk of eradication has been replaced by talk of suppressing the virus to the lowest possible level and keeping it there. I get the fact that there need to be restrictions on our everyday lives and that many of those restrictions will be with us for some time to come. Much is said about those restrictions being based on the science, and I do not dispute that the First Minister and others will be conscious of the scientific advice that they receive when it comes to the incredibly difficult choices that they have to make.

However, ultimately, we know that every decision is a political one. As the number of cases of Covid-19 initially began to fall, the Government had an element of headroom and ministers were able to make decisions on which areas to prioritise when it came to easing that lockdown. There is no list for the perfect order that the easing should be carried out in, but there is a list of choices. When it comes to outdoor education, I genuinely have difficulty in understanding the choices that the Government continues to make. For example, I have difficulty in understanding that a choice was made that a group of 10, 20 or more older adults who might never have met each other before could all go on a weekend shooting trip together, but a class of schoolchildren who might well spend the week together in the classroom are not allowed to spend more of that precious time benefiting from outdoor education.

I could describe exactly what the benefits to those children are, but I am not going to; instead, I am going to let them do the talking. Pupils at Belmont primary school in Stranraer recently wrote to the Deputy First Minister to tell him just what Abernethy Barcaple outdoor centre, located in the beautiful secluded hills near Castle Douglas in Kirkcudbright, means to them. Emma from primary 7 said:

“I built up my confidence and overcame challenges while staying away from my parents ... I am very shy so I find it hard to make friends, but staying in a room with different girls I didn’t know so well boosted my confidence and helped me to make new friends.”

In another letter, Declan said:

“I had the best experience of my life at Barcaple. My memories will last forever ... Going to outdoor centres helps children develop so many new skills. It’s also very good for your mental health because of all the fresh air and freedom you get from being outside.”

The pupils also produced a wonderful video on YouTube, which I recommend to members.

We have only to listen to those young people to appreciate what outdoor education means for them and to recognise what they are missing out on. If the Government has made a choice—no doubt because it believes that it is the right choice to make when it comes to the priorities for easing lockdown—and providing that residential experience does not fit with those priorities, it needs to deal with the impact of those choices. If the Government allows the sector to collapse, it will be denying not just today’s pupils from Belmont primary the benefits of outdoor education but future generations, and it will be depriving them of the opportunity to gain lifelong skills and benefit from the unique experience that outdoor education equips them with.

The sector desperately needs support now. As Daniel Johnson highlighted, many in the sector have not been able to access any of the financial support available to businesses and other third sector organisations—it is very much the forgotten sector.

Scouts Scotland has warned that it is set to lose £2.3 million this year alone. A collapse of income is happening across the sector. Outward Bound has warned that, once centres close, they will close for ever. That would be a tragedy at any time but, as Liz Smith highlighted, at a time when children face spending part of their childhood in the shadow of this pandemic and when the benefits of outdoor education on mental and physical health are arguably needed more than ever before, it would be a travesty if the Government did not recognise the urgency of this crisis and did not do more to provide the sector with the support that it badly needs to save our outdoor centres, not only for today’s children but for generations to come.

18:05  

I, too, thank Liz Smith for giving us the opportunity to discuss the threat that faces Scotland’s fantastic residential outdoor centres and the threat to the experienced, well-qualified staff who help to make them so special.

From our world-famous Highlands and our brilliant beaches to the Pentland Hills here in Lothian, Scotland is blessed with some of the most spectacular outdoor space in the world. The pandemic has led more of us to get out into the outdoors. However, it has also highlighted how vital it is that we ensure that everyone knows how to behave in a safe and sustainable way when they are in those forests, mountains, beaches, seas and waterways.

Outdoor education plays an important role in that. Scotland was an early pioneer of outdoor education; it was one of the first countries in the world to formalise it as part of children’s learning. Now, every year, some 105,000 young people and children go on outdoor residential trips and day outings. The City of Edinburgh Council’s three outdoor centres—Benmore outdoor centre, near Dunoon, Lagganlia centre for outdoor education, near Aviemore, which I should say I am a friend of; and the Bangholm centre, right here in Edinburgh—provide outstanding access to walking, mountain biking, water sports and other activities. Although the Bridge 8 Hub, which is on the canal at the Calders, is not a residential centre, it provides canoeing and kayaking to school groups and people of all ages who might not otherwise have such an experience.

It is quite right that curriculum for excellence recognises that learning in the outdoors can make significant contributions to literacy, numeracy and health and wellbeing. If a curriculum does not include outdoor learning, it is not excellent. Research from Learning Away shows that residential outdoor learning provides opportunities and benefits that cannot be achieved in another educational setting. In its briefing, Scouts Scotland told us that outdoor learning is

“particularly beneficial to those who struggle to engage with more formal education”.

Outdoor education can help close the attainment gap and, if anyone is still not convinced—and I know that colleagues across the chamber are—a social return on investment analysis shows that every £1 spent by the Scottish Environmental and Education Centres Association generates over £11 of environmental and social benefits for young people.

The latest Scottish health survey shows no improvement in the sedentary time spent by children since 2015—that is five years—so we need to ensure that each and every child and young person can access outdoor educational opportunities. That requires us to preserve our outdoor centres for this and future generations. Sadly, we have already lost Girlguiding Scotland’s Netherurd centre in West Linton. Many other centres have reached out to MSPs in advance of this debate to warn that some are not getting any financial help beyond the job retention scheme and that they need urgent assistance.

Outdoor learning should be much more than a one-off residential stay; Scouts Scotland is right to point that out in its briefing. Who would disagree that it is a hugely underused resource? School residential weeks are a highlight of our education system. For some young people—often those from families on low incomes—it might be a journey to another world in which they discover strengths that they did not know they had and they are challenged in ways that build resilience.

Establishing and running outdoor centres is a complex operation that requires investment, and if we lose some centres, I am afraid that some will be gone for ever. Therefore, I join colleagues who are calling on the Scottish Government to do whatever it can to provide financial and any other necessary support to our fantastic outdoor centres.

I know that the Government appreciates input on where that cash might come from. Just a few weeks ago, research by my colleague Andy Wightman revealed that nine out of 10 of Scotland’s shooting properties, including some owned by billionaires, receive non-domestic rates relief worth £10.5 million. I suggest that, if we can afford that, there is money to support outdoor centres to get our young people cycling, kayaking, hillwalking and much more.

Of course, we need to keep our children, young people and their teachers safe, but we need to look at whether the guidelines that have been issued to schools are unnecessarily restricting access to outdoor education at a time when access to exercise and learning outside classrooms could not be more important.

Right now, organisations such as the Water of Leith Conservation Trust and the Green Team at Tynecastle in Edinburgh are keen to offer outdoor learning to schools. Schools are enthusiastic to take up that offer, but they are currently unable to do so. With social distancing even more important as a result of today’s announcement by the First Minister, it is time to consider what greater role outdoor education can play in the lives of our children and young people. It is surely easier to maintain safe distances when learning outdoors than in the classroom.

Scotland has a long and proud history of supporting children and young people’s access to the great outdoors. We need to build on that, not abandon it. I ask colleagues whether they would be interested in forming an informal cross-party working group to ensure that we take forward the work that has begun as a result of Liz Smith’s debate. I pledge the full support of the Scottish Greens to the #SaveYourOutdoorCentres campaign.

I call Richard Lochhead to respond to the debate for as long as he likes.

18:11  

Thank you for that prompt, Presiding Officer.

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a very significant challenge for the entire education system in Scotland, but it is right that the issues faced by outdoor education centres are given appropriate consideration. I add my thanks to Liz Smith for bringing forward this important debate.

The benefits of outdoor centres have been articulated eloquently by members across the chamber. The number of members who have participated in the debate illustrates the strength of support for Scotland’s outdoor centres. I could not agree more with virtually all their sentiments. Outdoor education experiences make a vital contribution towards a rich and impactful education for our young people.

I listened closely to the points that members made. Maurice Corry summed up very well many of the skills that people can acquire from participating in residential courses. He spoke about social and communication skills and how such participation can help the self-confidence and self-esteem of our young people. I listened closely to his story about his visit to my constituency in Moray and will forgive him for discarding a cigarette butt from the train at Elgin railway station. I am sure that it will have biodegraded over the 50 years since he was there.

Maurice Corry made important points about the benefit of outdoor centres in Moray, and many members referred to outdoor centres across the country. Liam McArthur mentioned the important role that outdoor education plays in helping more vulnerable young people in Scotland, Fulton MacGregor spoke from the perspective of his experience as a social worker in the justice sector about how outdoor education can help the people he worked with, and Alison Johnstone spoke about how it can help people who find it difficult to engage in more formal education settings. We all agree on the many benefits of outdoor education.

Like Bruce Crawford’s children, my children have taken part in residential courses—at Alltnacriche in Aviemore in their case—and I saw the benefits that they gained from that experience. I also have personal experience of such courses. When I was 18 and had secured my first full-time job, my employer had the foresight to send me on a residential outward bound course. I recall meeting people from different backgrounds to my own and the group discussions in which we had to open up about ourselves. I was pushed out of my comfort zone, both mentally and physically, and had an unparalleled introduction to the spectacular Scottish outdoors, which included hiking, traversing one of Scotland’s great lochs in a Canadian canoe and abseiling for the first time. Although it seems a lifetime ago, I still recall those amazing few days and the profound impact that they had on my young self.

I could not agree with the minister more. He is echoing exactly what every member said. Given the cross-party agreement on this, is the minister minded to accept Alison Johnstone’s suggestion to set up a working group urgently to see whether we can address the problem?

I will take that on board, and I am coming to some of the steps that we could take.

There is no doubt that outdoor centres support learners’ health and wellbeing, as well as their attainment. They provide learners with valuable opportunities to spend time outdoors and be physically active at the same time.

That is why the Scottish Government has supported the work of the Scottish Advisory Panel for Outdoor Education over a number of years. It is why we have promoted the role of residential centres to all our schools, as part of the broad and rich education that is offered by curriculum for excellence.

It is fair to say that no MSP, no minister, no education authority and, certainly, no outdoor education centre would wish to face the dilemmas that are posed by Covid-19. The Scottish Government has continued to work closely with representatives of outdoor education centres throughout the crisis to look at how we can navigate through the current difficulties. The positive contributions of outdoor learning and outdoor centres feature throughout our Covid-19 recovery guidance. Earlier this year, the Scottish Government provided additional funding to the advisory group to develop fresh guidance on the positive role of outdoor education centres; as others have noted, that guidance was published in August.

Our officials have also facilitated engagement between the sector, COSLA and the Association of Directors of Education, as it is the role of individual education authorities to decide the approach in their local area and to fund that approach appropriately. In addition, just last week, Education Scotland published a new professional learning resource on outdoor learning.

The question of funding goes to the heart of the debate. It has been raised in the media and in many of the speeches today. A range of funding sources has been made available to complement the funding that comes from local authorities and schools. Third sector organisations that run outdoor education were able to apply for support through our £25 million third sector resilience fund. We alerted outdoor education centres to the up to £5 million that is available in fully flexible, zero per cent interest loans, starting at £50,000, from Social Investment Scotland. The newly created £3 million youth work education recovery fund, which was announced in mid-September, contains an objective to support outdoor education. Funding through the Scottish attainment challenge and pupil equity funding, as others have mentioned, also continues to play its role in helping to fund outdoor education visits by schools across the country. A number of third sector outdoor centres might be eligible to apply for funding under the forthcoming community and third sector recovery programme, too. Finally, as others have mentioned, outdoor education centres have been able to access financial support through the UK Government’s coronavirus job retention scheme. Today’s debate reinforces, yet again, the case for that scheme to be extended.

The centres are campaigning to access additional dedicated support funding, which is an entirely reasonable campaign for them to mount. I do not need to tell anyone here about the very significant pressures on Scottish budgets, to which Bruce Crawford referred, at a time when we are facing unprecedented challenges. There are huge demands on the public purse at the moment. In the past 48 hours, my inbox has had messages from three different sectors looking for support packages, and we receive representations on a regular basis because of what people and organisations are going through due to the Covid-19 crisis.

Jamie Greene rose—

Andy Wightman (Lothian) (Green) rose—

Apologies to Mr Wightman—I believe it was a race to stand up there.

Notwithstanding the financial pressures that all Governments are facing and the funds that the minister has said are available, it remains the case that up to half of outdoor learning centres might close as a result of their financial pressures. Just before the debate, the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland issued a notice—other members might not have seen it. It asks whether a children’s rights impact assessment has taken place. We would not close primary schools without undertaking such an assessment. We must do the same for outdoor centres. Can the minister confirm that the Government will fully investigate any potential outdoor centre closure before allowing it to happen?

As the member is aware, outdoor centres operate under a number of different models. Some are run by local authorities, some are third sector, some are private and so forth. We do not have the influence that the member perhaps thinks we have on which institutions close. However, I have not seen the children’s commissioner’s communication, and I will certainly look at it and take it on board.

The Scottish Government absolutely recognises the very difficult position in which many of our outdoor centres find themselves. The Scottish Advisory Panel for Outdoor Education has asked whether a review date can be identified for a further examination of the Covid-19 guidance in relation to overnight residential stays; other members have referred to that. I am sure that members will recognise the difficulties for the Government in setting a review date at a point in time when Covid-19 cases are on the rise in Scotland, and as we are beginning to come to terms with the First Minister’s profound announcement this afternoon. However, we will continue to monitor the situation closely.

An area of policy where we can take further action is the apparent inconsistency in application of the current guidelines. Very good practice in some areas could, and should, be shared more widely among local authorities, as members mentioned. Some authorities and schools might not be taking full advantage of the opportunities for day visits. Some are ruling out all residential overnight stays for the entire school year. In recognition of the compelling case that has been made by the sector, I make a commitment that Scottish ministers will engage further with the advisory group and local authority partners as soon as possible to address the issues that were raised today and during debate on the issue in the past few weeks. We can also do more to highlight, clearly and prominently, what can be done under current regulations and we can see what can be done to develop a more consistent and positive application of the current guidance across Scotland’s local authorities.

We are listening closely to the points that have been made in this debate. We are listening very closely to outdoor education centres in Scotland. I pay tribute to all their efforts and to their resilience in the current difficult times, to the support that they are giving to our young people, and to their professional commitment and dedication to outdoor education. It is an important part of Scotland’s education landscape, as has been highlighted by many members.

We will look in detail at the different funding mechanisms that are available at national and local level, and we will explore how those funding streams can be deployed more effectively.

Today’s debate has been an important opportunity to highlight the role that our outdoor education centres play in Scotland. We must recognise the urgent challenges that they face and explore what more can be done. The Scottish Government remains a powerful supporter of the role that outdoor education centres play. I finish by paying tribute to the sector and thanking all members for their contributions. I assure members that we are listening very closely to representations.

Meeting closed at 18:22.