 The next item of business is a debate on motion 9213, in the name of Jenny Galruth, on let's talk education, the national discussion. I invite members wishing to participate in the debate, to press the request to speak buttons now on as soon as possible. I call on Jenny Galruth to speak to and move the motion, Cabinet Secretary, for around 13 minutes please. I'm pleased to bring forward a debate this afternoon during Scottish Government time on our national discussion on education. It was Professor Ken Muir's review putting learners at the centre which provided the rationale for the discussion and the recommendation for a national discussion on establishing a compelling and consensual vision for the future of Scottish education. It is this vision that I present to Parliament today. I am keen in the spirit of last week's debate to engage with the opposition consensually as we move the education reform agenda forward and to listen to any ideas that they may have to support the Government and ultimately Scotland's children and young people in that endeavour. This morning I visited Turbank primary school in Portobello to officially launch the vision with some of the young people who took part in the national discussion. Turbank primary have an impressive pupil Parliament and I'm quite sure we may yet see some of those representatives in this place in the future. My thanks go to the headteacher Mr Friend for his time and my apologies to my friend Ms Gladyson, whose primary 3 class I interrupted. For our older pupils and anxious mums, dads and carers, today is also an important day in the Scottish education calendar. Today marks the last day of the official exam diet. So I'd like to congratulate pupils and learners across Scotland for all their hard work. Today will be a day of reflection for many so it's timely that we reflect on the future of Scottish education. I want to thank the minister for our open door approach so far to our new position. I think she'll have seen in the national discussion report that additional support needs gets quite a showing and in fact the report refers to a flash point whenever this issue is discussed, particularly with parents. Has she reflected on that and what is her view about how we can tackle these long-standing problems? I thank the member for his point. I'll come on to talk about the challenge presented in the reports in relation to the issue that he has addressed. He will also be well versed in relation to the increase that we've seen in additional support needs pupils in the course of the last 10 years. I think that it's increased and we now have just over a third of all pupils in Scotland with some level of identified additional support needs. I think that there is more that government will need to do, but I also recognise that this is about partnerships ultimately, it's about local authorities and wider partnerships too within school communities. I'm going to come on to talk about that in my response today, but today is not to the government's fulsome response to the report. You'll understand. Of course, I think that, as we've heard, it's been embargoed until 10-3 today. More broadly though, to the member's point, I think that the report doesn't sit in isolation. We also have the Hayward review into the qualifications in the senior phase. We also have the Withers review in relation to our skills delivery. I think that we need to have a holistic and coherent approach across government in relation to the future of Scottish education, and I want to say some more about that in my remarks today. Back in 2002, when I was in my last year at school, the then Scottish Executive launched a national debate on schools for the 21st century. That debate generated over 1,500 responses, and it was estimated that over 20,000 people took part. 21 years later, the national discussion reached an estimated 38,000 people with over 5,600 responses. I am indebted to Professor Carol Campbell and Professor Alma Harris, both internationally respected education experts and members of our international council of education advisors, the national discussion facilitators. Today, I thank them personally for their commitment and dedication, and I would also like to pay tribute to every person and organisation who took part in the discussion. The national discussion is the biggest engagement exercise ever to have taken place in Scottish education. It was co-convened by the Government and by COSA, and I think that there can be no doubt that the discussion had children and young people at its heart, and that, in general, it was consensual. There were a number of events and discussions that took place in every part of Scotland. Those were led by schools, community groups and third sector organisations supported by the Scottish Government and local authorities. We heard from parents, primary school pupils, island communities, young carers, children with additional support needs, as we have heard teachers, trade unions, early years practitioners, speakers of Gaelic and Scots to name just some. Time and again, the facilitators were told by participants that they welcomed the opportunity to give their views and they wanted more opportunities for engagement. So I commit today to ensuring that that engagement opportunity continues throughout our education reform programme. We have to get this right for the next generation and we can't do that without continuing to listen. The agreed vision states that children and young people are at the heart of education in Scotland. The Scottish education system is grounded in collaborative partnerships that engage all learners, the people who work within and with the education system, parents and carers, to ensure that all learners in Scotland matter. All learners are supported in inclusive learning environments that are safe, welcoming, caring and proactively address any barriers to learning and inequities that exist or arise. Education in Scotland nurtures the unique talents of all learners ensuring their achievement, progress and wellbeing. Each child and young person in Scotland has high quality learning experiences which respect their rights and represent the diversity of who they are, one minute, and the communities they live in. Each child and young person receives great teaching, resources and support for joyful learning that builds their confidence and equips them to be successful and to contribute in their life, work and world so they know how much they matter. I am not sure whether she has just read a statement of her objectives or whether she is trying to reflect the reality. I hope that it is the former and not the latter. What this report illustrates throughout it and in every aspect of the report is that there is frustration, unhappiness and a desire for improvement. I quote that Jenny Gilruth, as the incoming cabinet secretary, will be someone who will bring a breath of fresh air that she will address the issues that are raised in this report with the honesty and integrity that I think I expect of her and others expect of her. I do not live up to your expectations, Mr Kerr, but, in seriousness, the vision that I address to Parliament is the vision from the document itself. It is for the Government to respond to that vision, as I alluded to in my response to Mr Rennie. Given that members have only had the report since Thursday of last week and that it has been embargoed until 10-3, the member will understand that the Government will need to take time to respond to the report, but I intend to do so in a fulsome manner. One that also respects and acknowledges the plethora of other reports that are on-going at the current time in Scottish education, I think we need that holistic approach as we move forward. I am very mindful, as I have just outlined to Mr Kerr, that the Opposition has not yet had time to fully digest what is a very substantive report. Equally, as I mentioned to Mr Kerr, I am not going to stand here today and give members answers to all the issues that are raised in the national discussion. It is right that the Government takes time to consider our response. I need to reflect that the report takes place in that broader review format in relation to the other on-going matters in Scottish education at the current time. I am happy to do so. I have just left around table on children with additional support needs, and one of the comments that was made was that the only certain thing in education is reform. Can the cabinet secretary guarantee that another certainty from this report will be action from the Government? I am happy to give Pam Duncan-Glatti that absolute reassurance today. I think that we need to move forward at pace in relation to reform, but we also need to make sure that we continue to engage with the profession. That is hugely important in relation to where we will get on reform. We need to take teachers and those who work in our education sector with us, and fundamentally our children and young people. I want to touch on a number of the important findings that were captured in the national discussion. The first relates to joy, perhaps not a word that we hear often in the chamber, but the simple proposition being that learning should be joyful. The discussion goes on to talk about professionals who spoke of instilling the joy and igniting the love of learning and their appreciation about the opportunity to talk about that with each other. Teaching can be joyful. I think that we need to reflect, yes, in Government, but through other organisations, as Pam Duncan-Glatti alluded to in relation to reform, whether local councils or those education bodies, how can we better empower the profession to create space so that they can enjoy what they do best? My modern studies teacher at school used to call it the light bulb moment, the exact moment when you realise that you have taught a child a concept and that they have understood it. Fundamentally, we want people who teach our children and young people to love what they do, to have a passion for it, and the report talks about the respect that exists for a graduate-level teaching profession. We will talk later about a human-centred educational improvement that places people who work in education, especially those such as teachers, who are directly responsible for teaching and supporting children and young people, at the centre of informing and leading educational improvement. That also speaks to the Conservative amendment, which talks about empowering the profession to be more autonomous. I agree with that sentiment. I want to work with our teaching professional associations and how that can be better supported as we move forward with reform. As I mentioned previously, the context of the national discussion is also important in relation to the other reports that have been commissioned by the Government that will publish in the coming weeks. However, it is also important to reflect the global context in which the report notes, and that talks to the challenges in relation to austerity, cost of living crisis, climate change and a war in our world in which the report notes cannot be downplayed. We discussed in last week's debate the anxiety experienced by young people during lockdown and the associated impacts on their mental health. However, our schools are not hospitals for all ailments. They cannot respond independently without partnerships and without experts who can help. The discussion talks about networks and collaborations with a range of communities. Visit any school in Scotland, you will see that collaboration in practice, whether it is social work, the local rotary club, DIYW, active schools or even Scottish operas. I was hearing it to our bank primary earlier today. Indeed, as the professors recognise, reform is not just about change for change's sake. There is a lot to be proud of in Scottish education, so much that we can build on. The report, rather, is supportive of curriculum for excellence's focus on numeracy and literacy. It recognises the commitment to equity and inclusion, to a broad-based curriculum, to tackling the poverty-related attainment gap, to wellbeing and support for a highly skilled teaching qualification. However, there is also recognition that more needs to be done to ensure continuous improvement. Respondents to the discussion also raise the need for every child to be educated in a safe, inclusive environment, which respects relationships where effective anti-bullying strategies are in place. As I set out in the debate last week, we have a level of challenge here at the current time in relation to the thematic inspection that was carried out by Education Scotland some time ago. We know that only a third of schools, for example, do not use CMIS to record bullying incidents. I have discussed this matter with COSA directly to ensure that we have more consistency as we move forward. The facilitators have also heard about the levels of children and young people with additional support needs, as we have heard from Mr Rennie, and as I am sure we will hear this afternoon. It is important that we take that away as a strong action point from the report, and we seek to embed that in the reform agenda as we move forward. I do not think that we can walk away from the presumption of mainstreaming. That is a hallmark of the inclusive education system that we have in Scotland. We have a responsibility to ensure that the system for young people that is put in place allows them to flourish in the mainstream environment. Too often, we all know of examples where that has not been the case, and it should not be for parents or carers to have to fight for that entitlement. There is a strong theme in the report on skills-based and practical learning, on learning for life and on ensuring that skills-based learning and qualifications are given parity of esteem with academic qualifications. There is also a focus on the need for inclusivity and diversity to be embedded at all levels. Like any curriculum, Scotland's curriculum for excellence needs checks and balances to be in place to ensure that it continues to be relevant. Further, to meet the needs of our children and young people to ensure that those who are working in our schools are supported to deliver the curriculum successfully. It is absolutely right that we continually look to evolve the current curriculum delivery model and we equip our learners with the challenges that they will face in the future. The vision itself is the starting point as we look to the future. The challenge for all of us in Scottish education now is to work together to make this vision a reality. The call to action that has been developed by the facilitators drawing on the national discussion sets out the principles from which we can build actions to make the improvements that we need to see in Scottish education. As intimated earlier today, a number of independent reports exploring specific aspects of our education system are due to report in the near future. I will be considering the outputs of the national discussion alongside those reports. It is right that we take time to reflect and I will provide a detailed response to the national discussion in the autumn. The reform of our education system, as I mentioned, is quite rightly ambitious and it is ambitious for our young people, but it also needs to be pursued at pace. I recognise some of the challenges that the pandemic has presented the education system with. I think that our reform agenda is ambitious but we need to take teachers with us, we need to take those who work in our schools with us and we need to take our young people with us. I look forward to working with my local government partners and everyone with an interest in Scottish education to make the vision of the national discussion a reality. I call on the chamber today to welcome the publication of the discussion, endorse the vision and work with the Scottish Government and COSLA to turn this vision into reality. There is an optimism for the future of Scottish education and, as the facilitators note, an enthusiasm to be part of taking the outcomes of the national discussion forward. There is also an overwhelming appetite for change in Scottish education. Let's not miss this opportunity and commit today to making that optimism a reality to ensure that we deliver that vision for Scottish education that ensures that all learners matter. Can you move the motion, please? I move the motion in my name. Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. I now call on Stephen Kerr to speak to a move amendment 9213.3 around nine minutes. I move the amendment in my name. As I tried to intervene on the cabinet secretary to say, it's important that we have an honest discussion about where we are in Scotland with Scotland's education system. The SNP really shouldn't try to disguise its positivity of positive ideas or policies by trying to hide behind the national discussion. We can all very clearly see that Hamza Yousaf and his ministers are scratching around for policy ideas. Just look at last week. I thank goodness that the Scottish Conservatives had ideas about tackling violence in schools. The Government could then copy and paste the Scottish Conservative motion with minor adjustments and present it as its initiative, and I'm not moaning about it. I wish they'd do it more often. I'm happy to give way to the cabinet secretary if she will just update us on when the summit that she proposed is going to take place. The national discussion didn't come about in relation to the current First Minister. This has been commissioned as a result of the Mure report. It feels to me that the member may have come with a pre-prepared script to the chamber today and perhaps has not engaged in reading the report itself. I would certainly encourage him to do so. It is a substantive body of work. I already gave an undertaking last week during what was a consensual debate in relation to behaviour and relationships in schools that I would come back to Parliament with proposals. I have yet to receive proposals from my officials on that, but I do intend to take action on this matter before the end of the parliamentary session. I gave Mr Kerr an undertaking on this last week, and I asked Mr Kerr really to respond. Is this the best that he can do for Scotland's children and young people? Let's work together more positively and consensually to deliver the improvements that we need to see in Scottish education. That's my challenge. Stephen Kerr, I would encourage interventions to be a little brief first, not just from the cabinet secretary, but from Mr Kerr himself. Mr Kerr, I'll give you some of that time back. Thank you very much. Well, there we have it. That was the response from the cabinet secretary. But this Government is now in its 17th year in office. It can't hide its record in education behind the national discussion. That is my point. My message to Jenny Gilruth and her colleagues is straightforward. Please listen. Listen to what the people are saying is going wrong and act on it. The final report of the national discussion, all the errors in Scotland matter—and I have read it and, by the way, I think that we should have published it long before 10-3—it's a separate matter—is what the people of Scotland are telling this loud and clear. That's why the report should make the ministers feel very uncomfortable indeed, because I repeat that we're in the 17th year of a Government that said education was its number one priority. I'm very grateful to Stephen Kerr to give way. Would he agree with me that, after 17 years, it should be of extreme concern that what the young people responded to in this consultation was a fear about being at school? I'm going to quote from the report 9.3. We heard many concerns about whether the national discussion would lead to genuine action and significant change. We heard frustration and cynicism anger in some cases about whether transformational education reform is recommended by the Mure review would be implemented in Scotland. We heard concerns about whether there would be a tendency to continue the status quo rather than embracing an opportunity for the entire system to do things differently. 9.3. As we entered the 17th year of this SNP Government, people feel cheated. They feel let down. They feel angry. They've seen an SNP Government big on words, big on promises, infinitesimally small on delivery. I'm grateful to Mr Kerr for giving way. Does Mr Kerr welcome the fact that, on the most recent data, a record number of young people are leaving Scottish education to go to positive destinations at 95.7 per cent? Does that not, in any way, register on Mr Kerr's view of the world as being a good thing? Of course I welcome positive destinations, but the definition that this Government uses to positive destinations can mean just about anything. The tracking only goes for so many months after the young people leave school. I'm afraid that it leaves a lot to be desired. That is my honest response to that intervention from John Swinney. Much needs to be improved. Going back to the report, there is a groundswell, as has been referred to, of current support for educational improvement, which cannot be lost, ignored or sidelined. Again, 9.3. Professors Campbell and Harris, the independent facilitators, conclude that now is the time for action, most critically, time for the right action. My question is, will this Cabinet Secretary set herself apart from her predecessors? Will she take action that parents, teachers and school leaders are begging for to reform Scotland's education system? We all know that the business of government is the business of tough choices, and the Cabinet Secretary isn't going to be able to please everybody because doing the right things very often results and at least temporary unpopularity. However, if Jenny Gilruth makes the right decisions for Scottish educational reform and she meets resistance, I can assure her that we in those benches will support her. I hope that the events that lie ahead will show that we are fortunate to have a former teacher as the Cabinet Secretary for Education. I know that she will empathise with the concerns writ large in this report about teacher recruitment and retention should have been fixed a long time ago. The report highlights the job insecurity to many teachers' experience. How can teachers, particularly newly qualified teachers, plan their future lives when they are stuck on a temporary contract? The report goes on. We heard about exhaustion, stress, anxiety, burnout, affecting people's capacity to do their work and negatively impacting their personal lives at 6.1.22. This is what we were talking about last week when we called on the Government to provide extra support to teachers in the form of a national helpline. Employee helplines are very common in businesses and other organisations. It is something that can be done now to provide teachers with an outlet because we need to rebuild teacher morale. Comments for teachers and pupil support assistants speak of a profession of roles that have been underappreciated for far too long. This is why the Scottish Conservatives have called for a new deal for teachers. This report backs up what we are talking about. We want to see reduced contact hours for teachers to plan and prepare lessons, teachers paid for extracurricular activities, competitive salaries offered for specialist subject teachers, cuts to excessive bureaucracy to let teachers teach, the opportunity for teacher sabbaticals to help them to develop professionally and new pathways into teaching to attract the best talent. Beyond those proposals, there are three specific issues that I hope I have time to mention that we need to openly and calmly debate. First, the autonomy of head teachers. I have always felt that it was far better to trust head teachers to run the schools they know and the school populations they know in the communities that they know than to leave decisions in the hands of national, regional or local authority managers. There must be accountability and we need to give careful thought as to how that can be best achieved, but head teachers should have the freedom to innovate and lead according to the needs of the pupils in their care. Secondly, I don't know if I have time. Do I have time? You were a bit of time back. I will take an intervention. Ross Greer briefly. I am grateful to the member for taking an intervention. I strongly agree on the need for more autonomy at schools, but the member may be familiar with proposals in the last session for a head teacher's charter. When the education committee took evidence on that with 32 head teachers, their response was unanimous. They wanted the school to be empowered. They did not, as an individual, want to be empowered because they wanted their whole team to take that approach to making decisions in their school. Stephen Kerr. Leaders in any walk of life are leaders that lead teams of people. That's a fact, so I don't disagree with that. Secondly, there's a great deal in the report about the value of play-based learning. We should review formal schooling starting age, perhaps to age six. Starting age is six in Germany, Spain, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, and is seven in Finland and South Korea, something that we should look at. Thirdly, we need to give serious consideration to the presumption of mainstreaming for children with additional support needs. There is clear evidence in the report that what we have currently is not working. The report recounts concerning and troubling experiences from parents about their child, this is a quote, not receiving timely and necessary supports and sometimes inappropriate use of exclusions and other sanctions. The need for appropriate ASM provision is now urgent, 5.2.10. In large classes, pupils with additional support needs struggle to learn, their classmates struggle with their sometimes distressed behaviour. It is high time we address this. The people of Scotland care passionately about their education system. The end of the report states, quote, the scale of the response is unprecedented in the history of national engagements about Scottish education, 9.2. That makes me proud, proud to be part of this great nation that we care so passionately about our education system. But here's what the report concludes, and I will conclude, quote, one thing is clear, there is an overwhelming appetite for change. Presiding Officer, the people of Scotland are watching and waiting. We urgently await action from this SNP Government. More words won't cut it, and I call on the Government to show teachers, school leaders, parents and pupils that they have listened to the national discussion and will now act on it. Pam Duncan-Glancy to speak to and move amendment 9213.1 around seven minutes. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I move the amendment in my name. It's always a privilege to open for Scottish Labour to discuss education. The education system is where children grow and learn, and it is the foundation of the future of the next generation. That's why it's imperative that we get it right and why it's so important to listen and take on board all that has come through this national discussion. An opportunity, which has been said, has seen an unprecedented level of response to the engagement on the education system here. No small feat and one that should be commended. I want to say a particular thank you to the 26,000 children and young people who took part and to Professor Carol Campbell and Professor Alma Harris who have produced the report. I also want to say from the outset that we will support the Government's motion today. One thing is clear, and we cannot emphasise this enough. There is an overwhelming appetite for change. Now is the time for action, most critically the right action. As colleagues have already said, those are not just my words but are from the conclusion of the report drawing on responses from tens of thousands of young people, teachers, pupils, employers and trade unions. There is no ambiguity in that statement. Those that have engaged are telling us clearly that things are not working as they are. But the fact is that much of what they have said and what they are calling for is not new. It is a reiteration of much of what they have been saying and Scottish Labour have been telling the Government for years. Only to be met with broken promises and a lack of action. That is why a discussion designed to focus on the future of the system, a great deal in that discussion, a great deal of what was heard, was about contemporary challenges and issues. A lack of adequate resource, disjointed policy, a labour-intensive curriculum that is cluttered and has unwielded requirements and outcomes, creating gaps between its principle and how it is applied in practice. Had the Government stuck to the promises that it has made over the years, perhaps those problems would not be so entrenched. But the reality is that a fundamental failure to stick to its own commitments on increasing teacher numbers, reducing non-contact time and making class sizes smaller to name a few in many places is rolling back. Has left teachers with the impossible task of trying to deliver truly person-centred education in a system that is overstretched and constrained by a lack of resource, particularly while they themselves are plagued by exhaustion and burnout, facing another increasing and intensifying workload battling poor conditions. Change that is visible is not just overdue, it is urgent. The system is already beginning to unravel and that must be halted. One of the key messages from young people who participated in this engagement exercise, as my colleague Martin Whitfield has already highlighted, was that they wanted to feel safe and secure, free from bullying, intimidation and harassment. In my view, it is absolutely extraordinary that safety is the number one priority for learners. They shouldn't have to worry that safety would be anything other than a given for themselves and for their teachers. But this chamber knows only too well that the current environment in schools for many is not safe or secure and it's not inclusive either. It is no surprise that the discussion has been overwhelmingly absolute in its conclusion that more must be done on this, particularly if we are to achieve the principal vision set out that all learners matter. More than a third of children in Scotland schools are now identified as having an additional support need. Such a large proportion of the pupil population means that this is no longer an additional but a fundamental part of our education system, which makes the fact that the number of ASN teachers has fallen even more galling. Yet it is all too clear that the current approach to additional support needs is failing. Again, the words of teachers, parents and learners are not just mine. It is failing the children who need additional support. Members will know that I believe that this is in at least part for disabled people because of the need to legislate for a more accountable person-centred system. However, as the report also makes clear, it is because there are insufficient resources and support, including staffing and specialists, to fully enable them. The reality is summed up by the concerning and troubling experiences shared by parents as part of this consultation of their children not receiving timely or necessary support, which witnesses have also shared with the Education, Children and Young People Committee. They are failing to those without additional support needs, who are losing out on the support that they need because teachers' time is therefore stretched. Neither of these situations is acceptable and can continue. An education system fit for the future must be welcoming and inclusive of all children to enable everyone to learn and flourish, to give all children a fighting chance. That requires time and space for educational professionals and support staff to develop their knowledge, expertise and practice, and to think and strategically. To do that, the report is clear. Implementation of the existing Government commitment to increasing non-contact time is necessary. This is not only crucial for addressing the on-going support needs of pupils in Scotland, but it is key to ensuring that we give teachers time to get involved in developing their profession and education in Scotland. We need to put teachers closer to where decisions on what happens in the classroom are made. Or, as the General Teaching Council has said ahead of today's debate, give policy about teaching back to the profession with the appropriate space and time to think and teach with impact. Ensuring education is fit for the future also requires staffing in schools that is stable to ensure continuation of high quality teaching, but instead we have high teacher turnover across the country. I think that we can all agree that teachers are valuable, but to retain them we must now show them that we value them. That starts by giving them the time that they have been desperately asking for. We welcome this discussion, but we must now all agree that the report that it has produced is a start warning that the time for talk is over and the time to act is now. There can be no more broken promises or delay. The SNP Government must heed today's report and what teachers, unions, pupils and Scottish Labour have said for a long time that much is still to be done and they must get on and do it. If they do this, if they act, we will support them in the pursuit of an education system in Scotland that is fit for the future. For the good of our children, for our future, it is time for change. I want to read an abridged quotation from the report. In my class of 30, four have ASD, three long standing separation anxiety difficulties, one has been adopted, one has a difficult home life and experienced the form of trauma, one is a young carer, two others have severe learning difficulties, eight in addition have normal behind track difficulties. There is only one of me. I can't give those 12 children enough of my attention to support their wellbeing, never mind their other 18 children in the class. That's the harsh reality of the additional support needs that I made an intervention with the minister on. She understands how challenging it is for those individual teachers to cope with those circumstances and meet all the needs of all the pupils, because it is about getting it right for every child. We had hoped that the Morgan review would be a start of real change, but I'm afraid—I think that the minister knows this—that we're nowhere even near the start. This should be a wake-up call to this report to have a dramatic change. Of course, I'm in favour of the presumption of mainstream education. I think that it's the right thing to do. It doesn't mean that it's always appropriate, but it should be the presumption in favour of doing that. If we are going to have that presumption, we need to have the resources to match it so that this teacher here, who is struggling to cope with the variety of needs within her class, gets the support that she needs in order to be able to deliver on that. You quoted from the part that I was going to quote from. I very much agree that it should be a presumption, but do you sometimes get the feeling that in some schools it's almost mandatory and it's not always in the interests of the child with, let's say, severe behavioural difficulties, nor in the other members of the class? I don't know. I hear reports of teachers who really struggle to cope with a variety of different demands. I think that they would love to have that great diversity in the class so that every single child gets the opportunity, but we should be challenging this to make sure that it is the right decision. That's what I think this debate helps with today. I think that every member in this Parliament has been around the school and has seen, as the minister has highlighted, the joy of learning, the fact that we are proud of what so much of our pupils and our teachers and our staff—we shouldn't forget the other members of staff in the school who do a brilliant job—but our job in this Parliament is to challenge. We should be impatient for improvement, so when we challenge it, it's not because we're against the education system or against schools or pupils or teachers or the staff, but we want improvement and we should be hungry for that change. That's why I will repeatedly challenge the Government on the casualisation of the workforce, particularly in primary schools, where young people often go for six years on the trot with one temporary contract after the other. They thought that they were going to be able to craft young minds so that they would be the workforce of the future, but they are struggling to stay alive in the teaching profession, which is why so many of them are leaving the position. I'm very grateful to Willie Rennie for giving way, and I think that he alights on a very serious issue about the length of contracts that are given to newly qualified teachers. Does he acknowledge that not all those issues—in fact, none of them—are in the control of the Government and all of them are in the control of local authorities who have been given the line of sight of resources that should enable them to give full-time contracts? What would Mr Rennie propose that should be done in those circumstances? I think that John Swinney is right that there is a partnership here that is required to work with local authorities to make this work, and the Government did make an improvement to baseline quite a lot of the funding that helped with that. We have got a surplus of trained teachers who are coming through the system, and we need to talk to the ITEs to make sure that we have the right supply and the right experience. We are short of secondary and we don't have enough primary. Ultimately, we need to challenge local authorities to make sure that they are providing the permanent contracts when it is possible to do so. I think that John Swinney is right, but the Government has a big responsibility to make sure that the pipeline of workers is sufficient of the right complex needs to make sure that we are able to get people long term. I am actually going to be running out of time. I would love to take an intervention. I have only really just started. On the exams reform, I would urge caution. I think that we heard from the report about many people who are wanting quite dramatic change in the use of exams and the number of qualifications, but this is big changes. We need to make sure that we take employers in universities and colleges with us, as well as parents and pupils. We need to deal with the two-term dash. We also need to deal with the interface between the broad general education and the senior phase. I think that there are some steps that I can go through with the minister that we could take now within the next few years as some tweaking to make those issues a bit better. We need to put a greater emphasis of knowledge within the curriculum. Of course, we need to have transferable skills, cross-disciplinary thinking, problem solving, but we need a good foundation of knowledge before we can apply those various skills. We need to get the contact time reduced by the 90 minutes that the minister and our Government have promised. We need to make sure that, through curriculum for excellence, rather than cutting teachers a drift, which I think was the experience from the early days of curriculum for excellence, we need to stop them reinventing the wheel almost every single year with courses. We need to make sure that the new national bodies provide course materials that they can deploy and use their skills to utilise. We need to make sure that the vocational education has a parity of esteem with the academic route. There is one quote in the report about an employer saying that vocational and technical routes are not worthy of an exam or qualification. Well, they do have lots of exams and qualifications, but the fact that that employer didn't know about it was an indication that we have got a failure of communication with employers. The SCQF framework is good. It gives us an opportunity to get that parity of esteem in the developing work force. I can just say this in conclusion. I know that the minister is new, but our Government is 16 years old and we do need to see results. We have covered many of the issues this afternoon. We will cover many more. However, there is an expectation that the Government and the Minister will deliver and will forgive us for being very hard on her if she doesn't. We now move to the open debate. There really isn't any more time in hand, so interventions will need to be accommodated in the time allocations. I call first Ruth Maguire to be followed by Liz Smith for up to six minutes. What kind of education will be needed by children and young people in the future and how do we make that a reality? That was the important central question that guided the national discussion. I welcome the publication of all learners in Scotland matter, our national discussion on education, and I am happy to speak in support of the Government's motion, which acknowledges the significant levels of engagement that the national discussion generated. There were events and discussions in every part of Scotland, events and discussions led by schools, community groups, third sector organisations. This was the biggest public engagement exercise on education to have been undertaken nationally in Scottish education, and it reached more than 38,000 people, 26,000 children and young people. Tasked with building a compelling, consensual, renewed vision, the agreed vision speaks directly to the voices of children who said again and again that what they wanted was a safe, inclusive education system that valued everyone and celebrated all kinds of success. I think that it's worth hearing that vision in full. Children and young people are at the heart of education in Scotland. The Scottish education system values collaborative partnerships that engage all learners. The people who work within and with the education system, parents and carers to ensure that all learners in Scotland matter. All learners are supported in inclusive learning environments, which are safe, welcoming, caring and proactively address any barriers to learning and inequalities or inequities that exist. Education in Scotland nurtures the unique talents of all learners, ensuring their achievement, progress and wellbeing. Each child and young person in Scotland has high-quality learning experiences that respect their rights and represent the diversity of who they are, the communities that they live in. Each child and young person receives great teaching, resources and support for joyful learning that builds their confidence and equips them to be successful and to contribute to their life, work and world so that they know how much they matter. A line in the report stuck out to me and I think for us politicians it might be a helpful guiding principle as we navigate our way through the coming reforms and scrutiny of the bold changes that may be required. That is to balance realism of what is needed now with inspiring optimism for education in Scotland. The report into the national discussion recognises that more could be done to support the quality and consistency of the implementation of existing policies and practices, but, importantly, it also notes the strength of what we have here in Scotland and features of the Scottish education system that must be continued and further enhanced, such as a commitment to valuing children and young people's views, a broad-based education, the foundational importance of literature, diversity and numeracy, the development of wellbeing, the pursuit of equity and equality, respect for a graduate-level teaching profession, the importance of work and working conditions to all members of the education workforce and the partnership that the cabinet secretary spoke about with parents, carers, communities and agencies, specialists and services. Ahead of the debate, Youth Link Scotland provided a helpful briefing note in which it states that Scottish education can remain too narrowly defined and too often understood as formal learning, planned for and delivered by teachers in a formal setting. The purpose of Scottish education is to ensure that all our children and young people develop the knowledge, skills and attributes to reach their potential in learning, life and work. I agree with Youth Link Scotland that youth work in all its forms can complement and enhance the delivery of the formal curriculum and the provision of support for pupils. It contributes greatly to raising attainment and to improving outcomes for children and young people. A future Scottish education system will need to not offer not just high-quality teaching and learning but also different learning pathways. The report talks of the need to reignite the joy of learning. I am strongly welcome that play and outdoor learning are specifically mentioned in there. I know not just as an MSP but also as a parent and perhaps even indeed as somebody who was not naturally inclined to thrive indoors in a classroom just how important youth work is. Any ambitious inclusive supportive system with children's rights at its heart will be clear that youth work is part of education. It would be helpful in closing if the Cabinet Secretary could talk a little to how the national youth work strategy will link into the educational reforms that are coming. I will end on that balance of realism and optimism. I want to acknowledge the issues that we have and acknowledge the challenges that we face around investment. We face those challenges right across our public services. We are operating in hugely challenging times. For meaningful educational reform that truly reflects all learners' matter, there will be difficult choices to make. The optimism bit, the vision is there and I believe that we have all the skills and resources in Scotland to achieve it. When Nicola Sturgeon told education leaders in August 2015 that education was her number one priority, I think that the vast majority of people across Scotland, certainly in this chamber, agreed with her. I certainly did. So when six months later she reiterated that commitment and told us that there was a new education bill forthcoming, promising greater devolution to schools, I was very encouraged. I was never somebody who would subscribe to the view that everything in our schools was going badly wrong, but neither did I subscribe to the view that everything was well and that the status quo was acceptable. In fact, I remember John Swinney at the time and I hope that I quote him correctly when he said on the cusp of introducing an education reform bill that the status quo was not an option and he was absolutely right in that comment. Interesting as some of the feedback is, I do wonder if we have been quite in the same place if the Scottish Government had both listened to and acted upon the collective findings of the Donaldson, McCormack, Cameron and Bloomer reviews in Scottish school education. All carried out by experts in their respective fields between 2011 and 2016 because the collective message then was that while Scottish education had much on which to pride itself, the school system needed to be shaken out of its complacency. Incidentally, exactly the same conclusion had been the case with the proposed Howey reforms a way back in 1992. Of course, those reports between 2011 and 2016 appeared at the very same time that the OECD, the Scottish Survey of Attainment, PISA, Reform Scotland and the Scottish Government's own statistics all produced compelling evidence that Scotland was flatlining when it came to attainment and worse still that the attainment gap between rich and poor was widening, thereby disadvantaging large numbers of young people. Something that was always fundamentally at odds with the basic principles of good Scottish education once renowned across the world. The 2017 programme for government proclaimed and I quote, A new education bill will deliver the biggest and most radical change on how our schools are run. Nicola Sturgeon went further and she wrote in Scotland on Sunday an article about the London model of cluster schools that that was worth looking at given that they were quite clearly delivering results for more disadvantaged pupils and I have to say I was extremely disappointed when all of that got dropped for some reason. Three things above all else matter to me. Firstly, teachers have not been sufficiently valued as key professionals. Graham Donaldson had interesting things to say about that, particularly when he said that too many teachers were reporting that they felt uncomfortable with regard to some gaps in their professional training. Of course it doesn't help when we see the soaring numbers of cases of verbal and physical assaults on teachers which Stephen Kerr's debate highlighted last week and which I know my colleagues across the chamber will attempt to deal with. Secondly, the Scottish Government has shown an extraordinary unwillingness to properly reform the education agencies, not just to rebadge them and move the deck chairs around a bit, but to properly reform them to enhance the support that is available to teachers. No-one can argue that Education Scotland and SQA have had a happy history in recent times. Indeed, when I was on the education committee of this Parliament for a substantial number of years, hardly a term went past when the committee's attention was not being drawn to significant problems within the agencies. Problems which meant that teachers felt remote and rather frustrated about the education agencies and that can never be a good blueprint for a successful education system. The main message of the national conversation is that education cannot stand still and that school leaders should not expect the curriculum to do either, which brings me to my third point. It is one that members have heard me raising in this chamber over many years, but I do so again because I am utterly convinced that it matters. That is the question of the extra curriculum. If you ask yourself what education is for and we should all do this, we need to consider the intrinsic value of education because it is in the difficult and perhaps perplexing quest for the answer to this question that we need to stand back and ask ourselves from a holistic perspective what we should be doing to ensure that schools provide education that is in the round. Extracurricular activity, or perhaps it is better named as co-curricular activity, has so many different definitions but it is an integral part of this process. This is not popular in some quarters. After all, extracurricular activity is not miserable and in the same way that you might expect to have scores of test results or passes at SQA, but it matters so much to young people. I do not believe that this type of activity can either be or should be condemned to obsessive quantitative measurement. For so many pupils, those activities are the most enriching. They help them to make decisions and difficult decisions. They build confidence and self-esteem, understanding what commitment means, what responsibility means, working in teams. In this post-Covid era, when so many youngsters' lives are beset by anxiety, these skills are an increasingly priceless asset. I believe that this is a teacher between 1983 and 1998 and I continue to believe it in my 17 years in this place, which is the very reason for my outdoor education bill. I am glad to see that the Welsh Synod with Sam Rowlands is doing the same and there is a likely one at Westminster with Tim Farron. We have a huge opportunity to get our education system right, but we need to be far sighted. We need a vision of Scottish education in an all-round capacity, a vision that will not just suit the economy but one that promotes a fair-minded and ethical society in which individuals are valued for who they are. I support the amendment in the name of Stephen Kerr. The education landscape has indeed changed beyond recognition over just a few decades, as has the world around us. From the education that I had in the 50s and 60s to the education that I delivered as a secondary teacher in the 70s to the 80s, there are worlds of difference in and outside the classroom. From the online world and technology, the needs of society continue to change and accelerate. What is taught will have to adapt, while also focusing on ensuring that children have the basic tools of numeracy and literacy. Indeed, there is much to be recommended, the broad base of our education syllabus, particularly in secondary and beyond tertiary. However, I welcome the wide-ranging report that endeavours to provide a broad discussion about what our children need in today's world to help them thrive and indeed contribute in their own way to society, but to make schools a place where inequalities are minimised, diminished and, most importantly, are a safe and happy place to be. I will focus first on for me the linchpin of that success, the teachers themselves. Something that remains constant is the value of a good teacher, and there are many good teachers. Some of us here no doubt can easily recall the good and distinguish from the mediocre no matter how distanced our learning experience. That evidence is the impact of the quality of teaching has on us even decades on. That is recognised in the report. One very strong theme that featured heavily in the responses to the national discussion was the importance of valuing and appreciating all educational professionals working with and within schools. We will listen to some robust news about the importance of teachers and the need for more support staff, including classroom assistants, learning assistants, support for learning staff and pupils support staff. We heard about the importance of class sizes, affecting how much time and attention a teacher or support staff member could give to each individual child or young person. Class sizes come next for me. The smaller the class, the easier it is to teach to give time to each child. I once taught a class of 40 and another of 16, and how I taught was determined not just by the character of that class but by the size itself. That, for me, is self-evident. I add in now inclusivity, which is to be welcomed, but it is not for me the answer for all children with, say, severe learning difficulties or behavioural issues. Not just for their development and wellbeing, but for the other children in the class. I refer to my intervention on Willie Rennie. There is a question about whether it is best for a child to say with very difficult behavioural issues to be in a mainstream class. I repeat in my casework that it sometimes seems to me that what is a presumption verges on the mandatory. I would add that I have had representations from parents with children needing substantial support in order to remain mainstream, concerned themselves that this is not the best for their child's development. This is especially the case if there are many children in a class requiring additional support. Turning to an issue that often again comes into my casework, that is the testy matter of how a school can deal with bullying. I quote again from the report, quotes, Within the national discussion we had many times how important it was for pupils of all ages to feel secure and free from any form of bullying, intimidation or harassment. However, it is again my casework experience that policies in certain schools are not always effective at striking that balance between the bully and the bullied. I appreciate that this is a difficult balance and I do know, for example, that the Scottish Borders Council is reviewing its bullying policy. For some parents, for example, there is the perception that every effort is made to keep the bully in school and not the bullied child. I also understand the position that some 30,000 children have caring responsibilities, which they might not always disclose to say a teacher, sometimes to protect a parent out of fear, whether basis or not, that social work might then remove them from the situation. For example, if that child is supporting a parent with addiction problems. Of course, there will be a duty upon a teacher of concerns about a child's wellbeing, brings alarm bells to bring the attention to the appropriate authority, so we ask a lot of our teachers and even more beyond my time in the classroom. Teachers, in my view, need also to have more in-class support and more non-teaching time, for example, for continued professional development. Sometimes you are just so busy, you haven't got time to do anything else. Finally, you can educate in its broadest terms even in a dilapidated hut, though that is not a suggestion from me to the Government. For me, it can come down in the simplest terms to the teacher, the in-class support and the size of that class. I am glad that the Scottish Government is finally taking charge on the future of education in Scotland. Our education sector has been wrecked with 16 years of SNP's failure. Failure to support teachers, failure to support pupils with additional support needs and failure to update an outdated and narrowing curriculum. I've got a lot to go and as some of my colleagues have already pointed out in the last 16 years, teachers number have fallen. The number of teachers in Scotland has fallen by 907 since 2007. The Scottish Government has not yet delivered on their promise to hire 3,500 teachers and pupils' support assistant. This puts a strain on both teachers and pupils and negative impacts class sizes. Teachers were also promised 90 minutes of non-contact time per week. The Scottish Government has made little progress in the meeting this. Teachers in our education system need to be valued and given time to think about and plan their teaching and learning outcomes. Teachers are not the only ones in our schools struggling. People support assistance provided essential support for children's education and social development. But there is currently a crisis in retention and recruitment of PSAs. This is primarily due to PSAs being underpaid and under-trained to deal with the demands of the job. PSAs often work with children with additional support needs without advocate training or support. This only further exhibits the lack of support available to children with additional support needs. A lack of PSAs in classrooms can create unsafe working conditions and can decrease attainment for children. Yet the Scottish Government has yet to outline exactly how they plan to support this vital role in schools that is heavily relied on both by teachers and pupils. Last week in Parliament there was a debate on violence in school. Violence from children towards other pupils or staff is often left to people support assistance to handle. I've heard stories from constituents about the daily violence, the experience in the workplaces as PSAs. They are often the ones who deal with the brand of violent behaviours and relieve classes of violent disruptions. Yet they receive little support or training on how to effectively deal with the violence in their workplace which once again causes me to leave the profession. The Scottish Government must move forward showing teachers and support staff that they are listened and valued within our education system. Only then can we actually begin to improve the situation. Presiding Officer, there also need to be some development in the curriculum being taught in our schools. The narrowing of the curriculum for excellence does not effectively prepare young people for the future. Our education system should prepare children and young people to deal with the major social, economic, cultural, personal and political challenges that are present in the 21st century. The current curriculum for excellence is ill-equipped to teach young people about this important aspect of life. The Scottish Government's recently announced Scottish Connection framework addresses the need to deal with the more difficult parts of Scotland's history including colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade. This commitment to address the throat settings of the past also needs to be done at home and in our schools. Presiding Officer, through learning about the past and Scotland's role in it, young people can be more open and understanding to the racial, cultural and gender inequalities that still exist in Scotland today. That way, we can send young people away from the education system more tolerant and with a better understanding of the social challenges that may face them outside of schools. Presiding Officer, progress on the Government's reform of education is welcome. However, it cannot be another broken promise. If anything is to be fixed, the SNP must recognise what the last 16 years have done to our education system. It is a real pleasure warmly to welcome to her role the first opportunity that I have had, the new cabinet secretary, and I have no doubt that she brings with her energy, enthusiasm and a great deal of effort and wishes her well. It will come as no surprise to members that I will focus my remarks on what I consider will be the huge and enormous benefits that will accrue to our economy, to our society and particularly to our children by teaching touch typing. A skill that I believe is one of the most valuable that we can possess for our working and personal lives and for the remainder of the century. This is Mark IV of the speech, so I will cover well hallowed...well, of course. Stephen Kerr. This is Fergus Ewing McEvoy. He will be absolutely delighted to know that at the Scottish Conservatives conference at the end of April, the Scottish Conservatives have adopted life and learning skills into our national policy, including keyboard skills. I am sure that he will be absolutely delighted to hear that. Fergus Ewing. I am delighted to hear that, and I think that it displays a particular intelligence in the part of the Conservative Party. My attempt is thus far too persuade. Certainly, Mr Whitfield. Mark Whitfield. I am very grateful to Fergus Ewing McEvoy and to match the fourth rendition of this speech. I think that it is also right to say that touch typing exists within the curriculum for excellence as one of the skills anyway in the IT. Yes, keyboard skills are hugely important, but it is the skill of touch typing that frees our young people from the physical challenges of physically writing, particularly in the case of children with dyslexia. Fergus Ewing. Yes, I totally agree with Mr Whitfield. It is in the curriculum, but the problem is that, although it is in the curriculum, supervision, which is essential, is not provided. I will come on to that. My attempts have failed thus far, but of course I will. Willie Rennie. I think that members might see a slight bit of co-ordination today, but as somebody who types with his thumbs, I think that there should be a greater education on touch typing in schools. I hope that we can persuade the minister to perhaps task somebody to make sure that it is given greater priority. Fergus Ewing. I am extremely grateful to Mr Rennie. This spontaneous expression and outburst of cross-party support is, of course, extremely welcome, but it is very serious because it does show, Presiding Officer, that this is not a partisan political issue. There is absolutely nothing I have got to say that there is anything to do with party politics at all. It is all about the enormous benefits that I think can be achieved. For virtually zero cost, just teaching the teachers to train teachers how to supervise young people, the average length of time it takes for a young person in supervision is 15 to 20 hours. That is a blink of the eye when one thinks of the time that children spend in school. Here are some of the benefits. With a short investment of time and money, children gain one of the best life skills and use daily in their work and for personal purposes. It sees a great improvement of self-esteem and confidence in young people, something that is so important and empowering when children feel confident they can succeed. If they are worried, if they are afraid, then perhaps it is far more difficult. For adults, the productivity potential benefits are simply astounding. A typical 6-hour day will complete up to three times more work than those without the skill. We hear frequently that broad aims and aspirations let us increase productivity. Very rarely do you hear about a very specific, clear-cut, concrete measure that can actually do it. That is it. I cannot think of any more efficacious way to increase productivity and empower people in their workplace to do work at a much faster rate. Certainly I will take another intervention. I am very grateful to the member and I very much agree with him. Can I also introduce to that the importance of being physically active all the way through your school life? Yes, I absolutely agree with that. I want particularly to say to the cabinet secretary that the information that I have, and it actually comes from members in this chamber as well in their own personal experiences and their own personal lives and families, is that it is especially children with special needs, as Willie Rennie alluded to earlier, with dyslexia, with autism, that can particularly benefit from the acquisition of this skill. We are moving from a life of difficulty, challenge, worry to a life of confidence, self-esteem and self-regard. I want specifically to mention that. One parent gave this testimonial. Our eldest son is dyslexic. Learning to touch type has unlocked his academic potential in a way unimaginable before this course. I will discard the last three pages of the speech, but everybody has heard it before anyway. What I just want to stress is this. I had a courteous hearing along with Dan and Robin Gifford, who run a training company called Touch By Type, and to whom I am extremely grateful for a very detailed briefing. I know that they have spoken to other members too. She makes the point that after running courses for 10 years, she says, I have yet to find anyone who has mastered the skill through self-learning. It requires repetition, encouragement and structured direction. Therefore, the reply that I received in the second of August last year from the Cabinet Secretary's predecessor that touch typing materials are available is fine. That's great. That's a start, but that's not enough. Supervision is required. After all, in conclusion, one would not expect a child to learn how to play the piano or violin or any other musical instrument without tuition or supervision. Therefore, why should we be different when one is learning how to use a different type of instrument and one that can empower people for the rest of their lives at almost zero cost, zero time, which I believe would make a substantial benefit for the people of Scotland and the economy over the decades to come? The package of education reforms to be delivered in this session of Parliament are the biggest since the curriculum for excellence was introduced. Indeed, in the case of the Hayward recommendations that I expect, they could be the biggest set of reforms since the Victorian era in that particular area. Some of them are overdue, some are the result of the pandemic and we probably wouldn't have had this opportunity otherwise, but they're all a hugely exciting opportunity. Organisational reform is absolutely critical to this, but even with really good consultation efforts, that can be pretty impenetrable or at least quite distant to most people. The national discussion was an opportunity for wider society to engage in this debate on the future of Scottish education. I think that it's been successful at that. We often hear the frustration that people have that Government consultations and their scope don't allow them to talk about the issue that they really wanted to bring to the table. I think that we should congratulate Professor Campbell and Harris for their approach, allowing people to bring whatever issue they had to the table to discuss the future of education. Debates in this area can often be quite challenging for not just the public but for politicians as well due to gatekeeping by established powers within our education system. In Professor Muir's recommendation for a national discussion, he made clear that it needed to prevent the narrative privilege of existing organisations. I think that that's been achieved here because I can't detect the suffocating hand of the SQA and Education Scotland in this final report. That is easier to do in this area than it is in organisational reform, but I think that there are lessons to be learned for the officials leading on the organisational reform in terms of consultation and engagement with pupils, teachers and wider society on what they need. Like the OECD report, the national discussion reinforces the core strengths of the curriculum, its vision statement aligns with the core premise of the curriculum for excellence, and the report notes that much of what's in the vision isn't new. The vision and values are easy to agree to, though I expect, even where in the areas of most significant disagreement between all of us here we could come together and agree on a set of common values. What we really need in our education system is more challenge, even what's in the call to action here is broadly pretty agreeable. If I have one concern about that, it's that those existing powers, those with the narrative privilege in education, can agree to what's in the report and say that what they're already doing will fulfil it, which is why we need that greater challenge. I really welcome the cabinet secretary's commitment to drive forward substantial reforms across the system. I'm very grateful to Rosgill to give way on that point. Do you agree with me that those people who've contributed and you indicate has been successful, will it not only be successful for those contributors if they actually see the results come to fruition and see a change in our education system? Absolutely. Mr Witfield has robbed me of the conclusion of that speech on exactly that topic, but the format of you said we did for the Government's consultation efforts absolutely needs to be the case here, because it's right that people are cynical about this, because we've been here before in a lot of these areas. I want to focus my remarks on recommendation 412, as the cabinet secretary highlighted, because I think it's fantastic that we need to reignite the joy of learning. That is a great example of something that is a completely agreeable concept. Who's going to disagree with that, but it is a challenge to deliver. I think that the Hayward Review is critical to that. The OECD confirmed that we're doing a pretty good job of delivering the broad general education stage of curriculum for excellence, but once we get into the senior phase, there's too much pressure to teach to the test rather than deliver the senior phase of the curriculum itself. Reforming our qualifications and assessment system to match our curriculum is going to be critical here. If we want to make learning more enjoyable, we also need to break it out of subject silos, and that would also far better align our qualification system with the needs of our economy. I think that the submission from the Royal Society of Edinburgh summarised that really well, where it said, subject-specific knowledge is no longer the primary determinant of suitability in the majority of graduate recruitment. What matters more are transferable skills and attributes, breadth of knowledge and experience, cross-disciplinary thinking and problem-solving capabilities. I agree with what he's just said. Would he be minded to support a more of a baccalaureate system to do exactly that? Ross Greer. I think that there's a lot of merit in the baccalaureate system, as Liz Smith said. I think that we need first of all a serious appraisal of what happened with the Scottish baccalaureate efforts that were previously attempted. Why did that not have the success that many of us hoped for there? I thought that Willie Rennie was right to say that we need to take employers and colleges and universities with us in any reform of the qualification system. Employers want wider set of skills to be recognised, acknowledging that in many cases they already are, but there's a disconnect there. Universities are an example of where reform of the qualifications and assessment system has already happened. Universities have raised far ahead of school-based exams when it comes to that move towards continuous assessment and alternate models. I think that they have a lot to contribute to how we move forward in this area. Reigniting the joy of learning requires acknowledging that learning takes place outside of schools. If we want happy children and young people, we need a good balance of school work with the rest of their lives, and that brings me to the question of homework. I think that we know that if we were extending the school day it would have a negative impact on children and families, but there's growing recognition that adults have a right to disconnect from their work out of hours. We need to ask if our current levels of homework are necessary and seriously consider ending homework in primary schools. If children need to get through that work, we need to question the curriculum itself, and if there's issues of cuttering in the curriculum, which is certainly the case in primary school, we need to resolve those. That is compatible with giving teachers professional autonomy in the classrooms for them to decide how to deliver learning in class, but it's for all of us here to have responsibility for children's whole lives. School can be a place of joy if it doesn't follow children home. We have significant opportunities over the next couple of years to deliver on reforms, as I said, and some cases are long overdue, and in other cases have only emerged as an opportunity in the last few years. There's a lot of cynicism about our ability to deliver them, but I think that what we've got here is the right package of reforms and the desire across the chamber to make sure that we leave a lasting legacy for decades to come. I call John Swinney to be followed by Sue Webber. That is a welcome debate on the future of Scottish education, and I compliment the cabinet secretary on the inclusive way in which she is trying to generate greater agreement, especially in this Parliament, about how our education system should develop. Securing that greater agreement matters, because quite literally the future of our country depends upon it. In working to establish that agreement, there has to be a willingness on all signs and among all partners to recognise the reality of Scottish education and to be prepared to consider evidence that supports the appropriate direction of travel. In that respect, the cabinet secretary may have to revise, refocus or even remove some of the precious interventions of some of her predecessors. I know she will have the resolve to do so, and her predecessors will just have to come to terms with that. Equally, other parties may have to be prepared to recognise more of the strengths that truly exist in Scottish education than they are prepared to admit. I am constantly struck by the often negative characterisation of Scottish education expressed by Opposition parties in this chamber, compared to what Opposition members say about the performance and the achievements of individual schools in their own communities and constituencies when it comes to getting press releases and media opportunities. Oh, I seem to have touched the wrong nerve with that one. I will give way first to Pam Duncan-Glancy, and then I will give way to listen. Pam Duncan-Glancy, I thank the member for taking that intervention, but would he also accept that satisfaction with schools in Scotland is going down, so it is not just that the Opposition is complaining or being negative. The people of Scotland are seeing the systems that they rely on declining. There is very high satisfaction with Scottish education, and there is very high confidence—in recent opinion polling demonstrated that—in the Government's stewardship of education. It is not helped by Mr Chowdry's characterisation of the Government having wrecked Scottish education. What sort of language is that? Mr Chowdry cannot substantiate his point, and it is inappropriate language to be used to characterise the debate. I notice that Pam Duncan-Glancy did not use her intervention to come to the defence or to justify Mr Chowdry's intervention either. I will give way to Liz Smith. Liz Smith. Thank you. It is most unlike Mr Swinney not to be listening to what I said, but I just read him a part of my speech that I have never been somebody who subscribes to the view that everything in our schools was going badly. There are a lot of things that we should pride ourselves on. Yes, there is need for change. I think that Mr Swinney was the one who said that the status quo was not acceptable. John Swinney. That is very nice, but for the five years I was education secretary, that did not feel like what Liz Smith used to say to me on a fairly regular basis. The national discussion has been well steered, not surprisingly, in my view by Professor Alma Harris and Professor Carol Campbell. They have listened with care to a wide range of voices across our education system and identified key values that should guide the development of our education system values that are ambitious, inclusive and supportive. Those are good, strong and clear values that can provide the necessary focus in our education system. The key is what steps do we take to turn those values into reality. I would like to raise three key elements that are critical for me in this endeavour. The first is the importance of ensuring that every child or young person is ready and supported to learn. Poverty is by far the key inhibitor to ensuring that every child has a chance to learn and to grow. The work of the Scottish attainment challenge, the introduction of the national minimum school clothing grant, the impact of the Scottish child payment, just three measures of this Government are key contributors to this process. The sincerity of others on this question about removing poverty would be demonstrated by a different approach on the question of measures to tackle poverty than those on welfare reform coming out of the current United Kingdom Government. The second question is the question of teacher agency and autonomy that is referenced in the Conservative amendment. Our children and young people will only be able to learn if they are guided by motivated professionals who have been able to develop and renew their professional capacity. I would encourage the cabinet secretary to intensify the focus on this element of the agenda, but that will involve Parliament supporting the cabinet secretary on the need for local authorities to create a more confident climate in which professionals are able to deploy their strengths and their judgments in their practice. I met far too many teachers and many head teachers who felt constrained in developing their practice by the overbearing presence of their local authority employer. If Parliament is going to value the importance of teacher agency, it has to be prepared to help the Government to bring that about. The Conservative contributions—Mr Kerr is not injured now, but Mr Kerr set out a whole range of different propositions, many of which I agreed with, which would be helpful to strengthen the professional capacity of teachers. They will all cost money and lots of it. The Conservatives are against increasing tax, they want us to cut tax and they have not supported the investment in the education system. We have to turn a bit of rhetoric into reality. The third theme is encapsulated in the not-selected Lib Dem amendment, which is the importance of parity of esteem for vocational qualifications. This is absolutely vital, crucial and seismic. Members can call it what they want. It is what has driven so many of the improved outcomes that have been achieved by young people in recent years. Mr Rennie cited the Scottish credit and qualifications framework, the development of new qualifications and awards, and the recognition of the potential in every young person is central to ensuring that our education system lives up to the values of this national discussion of being ambitious inclusive and supportive. In conclusion, without wishing to sound like an old man, one of the biggest differences that I see in our education system today to when I was in school in the 1970s and 1980s is the focus on ensuring that every young person goes on to a good, positive outcome. I received a fantastic state education in that period and went on to a good outcome. It was not the case for most of my peers, however. One of the strengths of Scottish education is ensuring that every young person gets a positive outcome, and that should be central to the national discussion. The SNP Government has presided over 16 years of failure in Scottish education, with the gap between the poorest and richest pupils widening and education standards dropping. The SNP has starved schools and staff of resources, and their curriculum for excellence has been a failure. The publication of All Learners in Scotland Matter, our national discussion on education, is welcome and serves as a resounding call to action for the Scottish Government to prioritise urgent and meaningful reforms. Acknowledging the prevailing frustrations that were mentioned in Stephen Kerr's contribution, the cynicism, the anger stemming from unmet promises of reform in the past, the report instills a sense of doubt regarding the Government's commitment to genuine and lasting change. Underscoring the necessity for immediate action. This Government has fundamentally broken the education system in Scotland, and urgent action is required to address these problems. I am grateful to Sue Webber for giving way. Does she honestly believe that the statement that she has just put on the record is in any shape or form compatible with Liz Smith's intervention to me a few moments ago? I think sitting and listening to the committee evidence that I hear from people, the attainment gap that we are seeing widening, the evidence that we are seeing of that dropping out of regional and national and international statistics, does say something and we need to acknowledge that. I want to acknowledge that those working and volunteering in the sector now, including parents and carers and young people and teachers, they are all ready to embrace change that is needed, the reform that they are seeking, they are ready for significant change. We have heard about the importance of a future Scottish education system, which was welcoming and inclusive of all children and young people, including attention to early identification and adequate resources and specialist supporters to enable everyone to learn and flourish. The Scottish Conservatives would encourage the use of digital technology from the earliest stages of school and in all subjects, not just the ones traditionally associated with IT, such as computer science and administration. Our young people want to use technology in their learning, but teachers and PSAs must also be provided with the continuing development opportunities to keep pace with this change. It is rapid and how and what people are learning. We should also deliver a laptop or a device of any sort to every pupil eradicating a technology divide between rich and poor. One of my constituents is a music teacher and he has raised with me some concerns around various discrepancies within music across Edinburgh. He works in a number of primary schools across the city with the youth music initiative. While he acknowledges the additional funding that has been announced for the youth music initiative, he does not believe that it is enough. That goes back to the extra curricular work that Liz Smith was mentioning. We are already seeing a situation across the UK in which most of the young people go on to study music at university and are privately educated because they are some of the few people receiving adequate music education. The Scottish Conservatives' new deal for teachers would allow more children in this situation to learn music. Linking to music is now abundantly clear that the wellbeing and health of children and young people is one of the most pressing and important issues in Scotland. Without proactively addressing the issue of wellbeing and mental health, any attempts to improve learners' achievement and attainment levels will be undermined. We know that there is a growing need for more support for children and young people with most long-term mental health problems beginning in adolescence. 75 per cent of mental illnesses start before a person's 18th birthday. Schools and colleges should be utilised to provide early, preventative mental health support to children and young people across Scotland. Mindfulness is the basic human ability to be fully present, aware of where we are and what we are doing and not overly reactive or overwhelmed by what is going on around us. Teaching mindfulness and therefore resilience in our young people will help them with the challenges that they face now and into the future. The nurturing supportive environment in our education system must start as soon as possible. It makes our young kids more resilient, as I have said. It can help to understand through mindfulness what is normal in terms of feelings. Being anxious and nervous is part of life, but it is when it gets overpowering that support and help is needed. At Corry primary school, and this was in the report that came, they have nurture clubs, a worry box and a deep stress zone and a point in the day for mindfulness, colouring and calm music just to relax. Having a focus on health and wellbeing and making sure that there is a safe space and available staff to support pupils who are struggling is equally important. People need a safe place to go and calm down and somewhere safe to speak when they are upset, overwhelmed or angry. In conclusion, while we are acknowledging that there are many policies, instances of good practice within schools and supportive groups that already focus on this issue, from the conversations with children and young people, it is clear that much more needs to be done. A future education system in Scotland must uphold norms, practices and values right across the system to remove the barriers to learning that young people encounter. The need for change is accepted by all those taking part in this discussion, so let's be brave, let's make the wholesale changes that are needed. I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. As my colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy said, Scottish Labour welcomes the Government's national discussion on education and the publication of the report, but it must now lead to the right action and positive change. It is essential that the voices of those in the education sector, especially children, parents and teachers, are not only listened to but acted upon. It should also be clear that we want to create an education system that meets the needs of all our children and young people without doing so. The sad reality is that pupils who live in more affluent families are still more likely to succeed in school and higher education and we won't close the poverty-related attainment gap unless we give our teachers and staff the proper resources to do their job. Pam Duncan-Glancy made some important points in this regard about non-contact working time. Resources will also be needed to better support children with additional support needs and to tackle issues such as violence in our schools. It will take the efficient use of resources to make our shared objectives a reality. A national discussion or vision for education will only be a national success if it delivers positive results for the whole country and particularly places such as Renfrewshire in the west of Scotland. I want to discuss the major challenges facing children and education staff in Renfrewshire. Renfrewshire children are currently facing a double whammy when it comes to resources. That will make positive change more difficult to achieve rather than easier. Not only are local pupils and staff facing cuts to the attainment challenge funding, they are also facing a massive bill in disruption from the dargable schools debacle. On attainment challenge funding, four of the nine authorities that have been allocated that funding are in my west Scotland region—Inverclyde, Western Bartonshire, North Ayrshire and Renfrewshire. That is a start reminder of the scale and concentration of poverty in the west of Scotland. Those areas all face massive cuts to their share of attainment challenge funding. For example, in Renfrewshire it is 71 per cent. I say to the Government that I do not have a problem with providing extra money for education in every council across Scotland that is badly needed, nor with reviewing how existing funding is being used and considering improvements. I do not have a problem with funding extra money for all councils by taking it from those councils that the Scottish Government itself has identified as facing the biggest challenge with the poverty-related attainment gap. Hitting the poorest families in the poorest areas the hardest will only worsen the attainment gap. One group of people that the Cabinet Secretary for Education should definitely be having an urgent discussion with is the parents of children in dargable Renfrewshire. A primary school was built with a capacity of 430 when, in fact, accommodation is needed for 1,500 pupils. The former education secretary, Shirley-Anne Somerville, told me that she had not seen anything like it, and I agree. Renfrewshire Council's cut, I will take an invention, yes. I am grateful for Neil Bibby giving way. Does not this whole episode point to a very important issue that lies at the heart of our local democracies? No one seems to be accountable for those things. No one seems to be brought forward to account for whatever. Does he agree that something needs to be done to change that dynamic in our local democracy? I absolutely agree that there needs to be greater accountability and greater accountability on this particular issue. There needs to be a full and independent investigation by the Accounts Commission and I will come on to that shortly. Because Renfrewshire Council's catastrophic failure to accurately estimate school role projections has left children with the joy of learning in Port of Cabins, and Renfrewshire taxpayers facing a massive bill of at least £168 million to fix this mess. The money that should have been paid for by developers should not have cost the public a penny. I am raising this not because this is just a little local difficulty, but because this is a major and scandalous waste of taxpayers' money. It is the equivalent of £2,000 in tax for every Renfrewshire household. It is the equivalent of nearly one of the CalMacferries that we have discussed many times in this chamber. The original mistake was bad enough, but the response since by Renfrewshire Council has been woeful too. The parents have now lost confidence in Renfrewshire Council's chief executive and director of education, and I have also called upon council leader Newn Nicholson to consider his position. That was not always the case. To be clear, when the debacle was first exposed, the parents council in Dargavo were clear that they wanted to work with the council and to work with them constructively and without recrimination to find solutions for the children and parents of Dargavo and also for Renfrewshire as a whole. But after months of trying to work with the council, they have had to give up. They have cited a lack of urgency in trying to fix the error, a lack of transparency regarding the Fiasco and the poor state of planning for the new primary school. They have also rightly questioned the sufficency of a part main's extension to cater adequately for the area's secondary school requirements, a sticking plaster approach, as Councillor Gillian Graham has described it. There needs to be accountability for this debacle and urgent solutions to ensure that no child in Renfrewshire has to pay the price of the council's incompetence. An external review by the chief execs club Solace, initiated and paid for by Renfrewshire council, simply will not command public confidence. The council already appeared to know the review's findings, given press statements declaring that no one senior currently employed at the council was responsible. There must be a full and independent investigation carried out by the accounts commission. The Scottish Government should be demanding this and accountability too. Not only that, they need to step in to ensure that their solutions are delivered, including financial support, that don't leave other children in Renfrewshire paying the price. Because families are asking how long it will take for other schools that need to get built to get built. They are also asking what other services, including education services, are going to have to be cut to pay for this failure. If families and taxpayers don't have confidence in Renfrewshire council, then I don't see why the Scottish Government should. Parents in Dargavill want a commitment from the education secretary today to have a discussion with them and action to follow from that. There are major obstacles in the way of achieving anything coming out of the national discussion for education in Renfrewshire, and no child should lose out because of the incompetence of their council. I call Ben Macpherson, the final speaker in the open debate. Today's debate and the national discussion as a whole are an important opportunity for all of us to reflect on where we've been, where we are and where we're going with Scottish education. As I consider my contribution to this debate in terms of ideas and suggestions, reflect on the report. It was interesting that the cabinet secretary talked about how she launched the report at Tower Bank primary this morning. I think about four of my friends who went to Tower Bank primary. One went on to be a professional athlete and then a journalist, another a successful academic, another a successful electrician with their own business and the last successful painter and decorator. All did well. I think about how the circumstances were then compared with now. It is undoubtedly clear that Scottish education has improved in that period. There has been more investment, there is more innovation, there is more room for creativity, there is more acceptance and support for those with different abilities. As we reflect where we are, we also need to highlight the positives of what curriculum excellence has achieved. In terms of successful learners and effective contributors, we know that recent statistics show that there are higher levels of individuals going on to positive destinations at 95.7 per cent in terms of the academic year 2021-22. Does he agree that we ought to really take the measurement of positive destinations further in just a few months into the post-school life of our school leavers? We ought to be tracking what happens to those people. It is so important that the future of our country shows that we should invest more effort in finding out what becomes of our school leavers. Efforts to improve our statistical analysis should always be under consideration, but there are also aspects of the curriculum for excellence that are less measurable. For example, the value that we place on creativity, which I know was a key element in the launch of curriculum for excellence and the focus of the architects at that time. For example, I heard Brian Boyd say in 2008, when I went to see him at the Edinburgh Book Festival, that lots of things are excellent and we need to consider the fact that we need to value those different ways of being excellent. We have definitely developed in that regard. We have definitely developed as a country in terms of having more confidence. Young people today are so much more confident than they were when I was growing up. In terms of a sense of responsibility, there is much greater civic responsibility when it comes to issues around climate change, around how we improve our society, that sense of internationalism that is much more prevalent than it was in decades past. It is not perfect, and I am not pretending so. One issue that I would like to highlight in the time that I have is the issue of violence against women and girls. Zero Tolerance Scotland highlighted in a contribution for today's debate that 64 per cent of girls and young women have experienced sexual harassment at school in recent years. I would encourage all of us to continue to support initiatives such as the White Ribbon campaign and to continue to focus all year round on how we challenge those negative behaviours and improve that situation, because it is really concerning. In terms of issues within the report, there are some that I just want to pick up on. Digital has been highlighted. The RSE made a contribution that, as a world enter the so-called fourth industrial revolution marked by increasingly sophisticated and integrated technologies, the way in which education is delivered could change drastically. We really cannot underestimate that in terms of artificial intelligence in particular. Prompt engineering may well become one of the most important skills in a generic AI world. If there are efforts that need to be made for us to get ahead of the game rather than catching up in terms of IT skills, perhaps that is an area that needs focus. That also highlights how important it was that the Government took the initiative, particularly during the pandemic, on digital access and inclusion, with investment of £48 million to deliver devices to around 60,000 households using and working with organisations like People Know How, who were based in my constituency. So how we get ahead on the technological and digital issues is absolutely vital. I also want to highlight the points that were made around breaking down the academic and vocational divide, as is highlighted in 4.4 in the summary report. One idea that I wondered if we should consider is how we marry up introducing young people and encouraging them to engage in the arts with how we improve and enhance their digital or practical skills. How we get that balance right is something that we could potentially finesse. I thought that Ross Greer was right to mention the issue of homework. I do have concerns and have done for some time about how homework contributes to the poverty-related attainment gap and that it is much easier for some people to do homework than others. I think that it is an area of concern that we need to continue to consider. Along with teacher training, CPD, are there measures that we need to take in that regard? Overall, this is the start of the next chapter of the conversation, as the cabinet secretary highlighted. We now enter a phase of engaging with young people and the profession. I am excited to see how that develops. I encourage us as a Parliament as a whole to be solution-focused and constructive. I am excited to see how that is taken forward and support the cabinet secretary in her endeavours to do that. I remind those of my declaration of interest as a former employee of the Slothian Council who I may well mention in my contribution. It is always a pleasure to follow Ben Macpherson, although I find myself saying that more frequently these days in the past, but I do think that he highlights some very important matters that have been pointed to in this report. In particular, his comments about violence against women and girls and the 64 per cent who have suffered violence and sexual harassment in school. I think that this speaks to the earlier interventions and discussions that we have a cohort of young people who are attending school and are not feeling safe. That responsibility follows on all of us to ensure that it is not the case. As all teachers and, indeed, all human beings know, if you cannot fulfil those basic elements of food, protection, safety and housing, then to expect our young people to achieve anything else is almost impossible. I am very grateful to Mr Wipfield for taking the intervention. I wonder if he would agree with me that what is absolutely critical to tackling violence against women and girls in our school is making sure that every young person learns about consent during sex and relationship education, because that is not currently the case despite aspirations for it to be so. I thank Ross Greer for that intervention and absolutely agree, because part of growing up is pushing against boundaries that those that surround you explain why they are there. Through empathy and understanding, discussion with adults, indeed discussion with young people of the same age of older and younger, people develop the tools to inhabit an adult life safely. I think we are letting our young people down not just in respect of consent, but with consent on a lot of these matters, that we are not giving them the experiences that they need to draw on to become the better adults. Indeed, one of the various foundations of the curriculum for excellence to be a better contributor and citizen of Scotland. I welcome the cabinet secretary's introduction and again the consensus that I think she is striving to make and achieve across this and again to echo Pam Duncan Glancy's comments, we will support the government, indeed we will support anyone who has the right solutions to these problems, but they are urgent, they can't wait longer, our young people are growing up. Indeed, if I can be slightly flippant as to suggest that if this is the cabinet secretary's P1 year, this government is actually just finishing university, so there is a period of time that we have to address and there is a shortage of it going forward. I very much welcome to her comments about, yes. Brian Whittle. I'm very grateful for the member for giving way. What I was going to say to my early intervention although we talk about the children today, one of the concerns that I have about our schools today is the rise in ill health, especially in mental health, and that is something if we don't tackle will have a huge impact on attainment. I'm very grateful for that intervention. I think a lot of the contributions today and indeed the report it's based on has talked about the multi-faceted nature of what a good education system looks like. It's not a simple solution and it's not the same solution for every young person, but there are essential elements. From the touch typing indeed that we discussed earlier with some level of humour, but with an importance that rests in there as it's a tool of communication, to outdoor education, to sport, to keeping fit, these are all elements that our young people need to experience. I am conscious of time and I apologise to those that I don't get a chance to make a mention of, but I did want to raise with the Cabinet Secretary this holistic and coherent approach across government with the publication of the Violence Prevention Framework for Scotland today, where there's a discussion in it from the Scottish Government that says, and I quote, For example, we are committed to incorporating the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children through implementation of getting it right for every child. And I would ask that that does not mean that we've abandoned the idea of bringing the bill back and placing it on the statute book here. Again, with a holistic and coherent approach across government it would be good to see joined up language so that we don't end up with questions being raised that are unnecessary. There have been some very positive contributions today and I think a lot of them have picked up a number of important aspects. I would like to point to Ruth Maguire and her comments on the national youth link strategy and the joyfulness of learning that she picked out, because we do need to recognise not necessarily qualifications but experiences out with school that need to be reflected and that young people very proudly bring into school, bring into their lives and schools should be places where that joy can be shared. The member is in his final minute. Very quickly. I just wondered, we haven't spent a great deal of time on further education and I think it's quite key to going forward in some of the aspects that we've spoken about so it's just to put on record can we have a commitment around that. Martin Watfield. Absolutely and it's right to say that education should be lifelong and in fact there's been much mention of the different areas of education throughout. We have concentrated to some extent the contributions on primary schools. But also on high schools, the reform of the assessment situation. I am conscious of the lateness of time. It's disappointing because I would like to have mentioned Liz Smith and Ross Greer's contributions and others. But let me finish since I gave the declaration of interest about Preston Lodge, a high school in Preston Pans, who for many years has had as its aims and values, achievement, respect, learning, community, but above all happiness. Because if our children can be happy in school they can be confident and if they can be confident they can learn and if they can learn then they can contribute. I'm grateful Presiding Officer. Thank you and I call on Megan Gallacher. Thank you Presiding Officer. I feel that parliamentarians have been somewhat spoiled over the last two weeks with not one but two debates on education. That's two opportunities for this Government to defend its record on their handling of our education system, but two opportunities for the Scottish Conservatives to promote new, bold and ambitious ideas to restore Scotland's education system to its once-renowned world-class status. However, I do think that it is a shame and a missed opportunity for the Scottish Government as they have backed themselves into their usual corner of denying accountability for the mess that they have presided over over for the last 16 years. They have previously shown a lack of willingness to fight to improve education standards and learning outcomes for our young people, have yet to announce any bold or new ambitious policies and have rightly been challenged by members on this side of the chamber and other opposition members during today's debate. The Scottish Conservatives made our position clear again today. The SNP are presiding over an education system in desperate need of repair. I certainly will. I was just wondering if Megan Gallacher was going to talk about the ideas and the solutions and the proposals rather than just criticising as the Conservatives see it, the Government. I think that that would take us into a better space. Megan Gallacher. I will just get on to that point, Mr MacPherson, but I think that we need to also look at the story as to how we got here and why we are having a national discussion on our education system. Let's get to this point. Members from across the chamber have examined the publication of all learners in Scotland on our national discussion on education. It was an interesting read, but my worry is that it will be another report that will gather dust in the back of a shelf in our Government office. That has happened before. In 2017, the Scottish Government announced a new education bill that was subsequently dropped and has not been spoken of since. I hope that history will not repeat itself. After all, the Scottish Government has had plenty of opportunities to bring in substantial changes that would improve outcomes for our young people, to give our young people the best possible start in life. They have been let down at every turn. I did have a chuckle to myself when the Government referenced COSLA in its motion as a solution to turn this vision into a reality for Scotland's children and young people. The SNP has stripped local authorities of powers and made them penniless. How do they intend to reform education when they do not have the right infrastructure, finance and resource in place? That was a point raised by Neil Bibby. I will, yes. John Swinney I am grateful to Meghan Gallagher for giving way. I wonder if she would like to tell Parliament how much more money the Conservatives would have given to local authorities in the budget propositions that they put to the finance minister for the current year's budget? I think that a better question for Mr Swinney would be why, when he was in government, did the SNP swander so much money that could have been put into educational resources? If I may pick up on a couple of the themes that were debated today, firstly, additional support needs. ASM provision is failing in many council areas, including my own within North Lanarkshire. Children are being placed within the wrong learning environment that is undoubtedly having a detrimental impact on young people who need more support. Stephen Kerr was spot on at his time when we addressed that. Then there were issues highlighted within the report directly, job insecurity, exhaustion and the stress that teachers face on a daily basis, violence and bullying in our schools, an issue that we debated only last week, and classroom sizes, which must be one of the biggest missed opportunities of the SNP's time in government. Why have they not achieved this goal, given that it was a manifestal promise in 2007? Of course, extracurricular learning. Liz Smith raised the importance of extracurricular learning that is vital to the development of a young person, both mentally and socially. That is why I am backing her member's bill and I hope MSPs across this chamber will too. Mindfulness, as was mentioned by Sue Webber, having a focus on health and wellbeing in the classroom is crucial given the modern-day pressures placed on our young people. The last theme that I wish to mention, and it would be remiss of me not to, is touch typing. Although Stephen Kerr's intervention stole my thunder, as the Scottish Conservatives have adopted touch typing as part of our skills policy, I am pleased that Fergus Ewing welcomes that decision. I will make no apologies when I say that the SNP have yet to make any real improvements to our education system. Teacher deserve better, teaching staff deserve better, pupils deserve better. I welcome the opportunity to have a national discussion about education. In fact, it is long overdue, but unless it improves the learning outcomes or closes the attainment gap, it will all have been for nothing. Listening to the debate today, it is the Scottish Conservatives that have the ambition to bring something new and exciting to Scotland's education system. There would be no more talking about change if we were in charge. Change would already be happening. For now, we will encourage this Government to do better, to give our headteachers more powers over their skills, to deliver a new deal for teachers to establish a national college and to introduce life skills as part of the core curriculum. That is the ambitious vision that our young people and teachers deserve. That is the vision that the Scottish Conservatives will continue to promote. I think that we have had enough education reports to last us a lifetime. No more dithering, no more delays. We need action from this SNP Government now. Everyone who has contributed to the Let's Talk education national discussion will expect nothing less. Whether the Government is up to this task, time will tell. I want to start on a note of consensus. Stephen Kerr said that he is proud of Scotland for the record engagement that we had through the national discussion. People care in Scotland about our education system and I think that we can all agree on that today. Pam Duncan Glancy spoke about the hunger for change in her contribution, and I agree. I think that we heard some of that from Meghan Gallagher, although I would not agree with the substantive contribution that she made. More broadly, there is a hunger for change in the education system at the current time. As I outlined in my opening remarks, the Government will accept the Labour amendment tonight. Evidence tells us that looking to increase non-contact time can help to improve learning and teaching. That is really important. We will work with the Scottish negotiating committee for teachers. I give Parliament that undertaking today, so that we will work with the SNP on that as an important focus for the Government in taking that action forward. I thank the cabinet secretary for that intervention and I welcome and thank the Government for supporting our amendment today. Can the cabinet secretary set out a timescale for when they will be able to fulfil that commitment? I am not able to give her one at the current time, but I am more than happy to write to her before the end of this session to give her an update on the timescales. In relation to Mr Rennie's contribution, Rennie spoke about mainstreaming. He said that he is in favour of mainstreaming and I very much agree. I think that he gave an example from his own constituent. It sounded a familiar one to me as a former classroom teacher, because teachers have always had to adapt to meet the needs of their pupils in classrooms. That is part of the job of being a teacher. The approach to the implementation of Morgan has been about a partnership approach between the Scottish Government and local authorities. They are fundamentally responsible for delivering education in our schools. We know that we had a progress update in October 2022, but I accept that there is more that we will need to do in that regard, particularly in relation to the increase of numbers in relation to the people who have identified additional support needs. Christine Grahame spoke about the numbers of staffing to that point for additional support needs, since she gave examples from her own teaching career. I could identify with some of those examples on how teachers adapt as a classroom teacher. I think that we all need to be mindful that teachers are skilled experts in what they do. They adapt to the class in front of them and tailor the lesson to the needs of their children and young people in front of them, too. Rennie Rennie was a quote from the national discussion report, rather than my constituency, but it is something that is familiar. I accept her point that teachers are skilled but this is pretty overwhelming. The Government needs to understand that it is almost impossible in some occasions when there are so many people with such a variety of needs in the one class. Does she accept that? I do accept that, but we also need to reflect the reality that we currently have the highest recorded level of support staff and additional support needs on record in our schools. That is directly a result of the Government providing an additional £15 million per year to help support those additional staff in our schools. I do accept the wider point that there is more that we will need to look at yesterday's Morgan review but also more broadly through the outputs of the national discussion. I think, too, from Hayward to ensure that we are providing that support to more challenging instances in relation to additional support needs, but also, as we heard in the chamber last week, changes in relation to behaviour and relationships and how that plays out in our classrooms. I am grateful to Jenny O'Ruth for giving way, but to be absolutely clear, despite what she has just said, the national discussion responses, and I will quote, it is in 5.2.13, the national discussion were clear that there were currently insufficient appropriate resources, including staffing and specialists, to fully support all children and young people's individual needs. The reality is that, although the level of additional support needs has risen to a third, the proportion of resources being expended to support classroom teachers with those diverse needs, that has not been delivered by this Government, has it? I am afraid that I would disagree with some of what Mr Kerr has said. I recognise the key points to me from the reports and, of course, the Government will come to respond to the reports in due course, but it is also worth saying that the Government is spending a record high this year alone on additional support needs. 830 million pounds in 2021-22 for giving me last year, Presiding Officer. We are putting a significant amount of public money into supporting these children and young people in our education system. I ask Mr Kerr and the Conservative Party if they would like us to spend more money from where in the Scottish Government's budget should we take that money. Ross Greer spoke about the openness of the approach adopted by the facilitators and the lessons that we can learn as we move forward with our reform agenda. I think that we heard from Liz Smith and Willie Rennie, too, about the reform agenda. Of course, I will be coming to Parliament in a few weeks time to give an update to that end. He talked about more challenge in the narrative privilege, and I wholeheartedly agree, having worked for two of the organisations that he quoted in his contribution. It is hugely important that we have a wider reach in terms of where we go on reform, that we do not just hear from the same old voices in Scottish education. I think that this report has been really successful, to that extent, to managing to get into local communities but to speak to children and young people about their views, too. He spoke about, and I think that Liz Smith spoke about this, too, about levels of cynicism, potentially, about the reform agenda. I think that how the teaching profession is engaged in the outputs of the Hayward review, particularly in the secondary sector, will be key to that end. I think that that was a response that I gave to Pam Duncan Glancy earlier. They need to be fundamentally part of what comes next. We cannot do it without them. Whether or not that is a diploma approach, whether or not that is an IB approach, we heard from Liz Smith. I have not received yet the final report, of course, from Professor Hayward. All of that should be up for debate, but we need to engage directly with the profession, who, as we heard last week in the debate in the chamber, have been through quite a tough time, I think that it is fair to say, in recent years. It has to also be joined up. I think that we heard from Mr Rennie about the interconnectivity in relation to assessment between higher education and what happens in our senior phase. Forgive me, it was Ross Greer who touched on approaches to continuous assessment. I declare our interest as being married to a lecturer. The different approaches that are now used in the higher education sector are night and day from when I was at university 20-odd years ago. It is hugely important that our school sector could learn from some of the different approaches that better support our children and young people fundamentally to attain their potential. It was good to hear this afternoon from John Swinney. He spoke of the strengths in Scottish education. He gave three substantive points, one being in relation to poverty and how that is an inhibitor to children and young people reaching their potential. I know from personal experience exactly what Mr Swinney means when he says that. That is why, of course, the Government has a programme tackling poverty in our schools, but there are a number of outside influences that the report acknowledges, particularly in relation, for example, to the cost of living crisis. There are also impacts on our children's attainment in our schools. The Government in Scotland is limited to an extent in what we can do to respond to that, notwithstanding. He also spoke about supporting the profession and the role of local government in that regard. I think that it is an interesting point that he makes, and I am keen to take that forward because of that, and on parity of esteem. That, too, is hugely important with the outputs of the Hayward review, but also with the outputs from the Wither's review, which will look at the skills landscape. I think that it is hugely important that we do not narrowly look at the senior phase and isolation that we look more broadly at skills delivery, particularly in our schools, who are really good at finding out the best pathways for their young people. Sue Webber spoke about digital provision. She will know, of course, that the Government provided substantial finance in 2020-21 to delivering 72,000 devices, and we are also working with local government to roll that out further, too. We know that about 55 per cent of learners may already have access to a device, but it is fair to say that we will need to go further. I recognise that point, particularly in relation to the outputs from the report itself. Neil Bibby has raised an important local issue in relation to school provision in Renfrewshire and Durgavel, and I give him an undertaking that I will meet with him and the parents affected. I know that he has written to me on this very matter, I admit, previously with the Cabinet Secretary on this issue. Finally, I give a commitment to Ruth Maguire that we are continuing to engage with stakeholders on the outputs of the youth strategy. It is really important that that youth work strategy ties up with the broader approach that we have seen from the national discussion today. I am conscious of time, but today has been an opportunity to see the optimism highlighted in the national discussion. There is an eagerness in the teaching profession, an eagerness from parents and carers, and, fundamentally, I need for all of us to ensure that our education reform agenda delivers for our young people. I say to Parliament today that this national discussion provides us with that foundation for the agenda to move forward, but we all have an obligation to engage in that agenda in good faith. I commend the national discussion to Parliament today, and I commit to work with all parties on delivering at Scotland, in which every learner does matter.