 The next item of business is the statement by Shirley-Anne Somerville on protecting teacher numbers and children's learning hours at school. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement and therefore there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Shirley-Anne Somerville, cabinet secretary, up to 10 minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to provide this statement to Parliament today on our commitment to protect teacher and school support staff numbers and the current number of learning hours for children and the action we will take to deliver it. The Government's vision for education in Scotland remains to deliver excellence and equity for all. Those measures are critical to our aim that is shared by local government to raise attainment and to substantially eliminate the poverty-related attainment gap by 2026. As I reported two weeks ago, there are promising signs that the attainment gap is, once again, narrowing. However, there is no room for complacency and there remains much work to do to support education recovery and accelerate progress in closing the attainment gap. I want to be clear that I understand the difficult budgetary choices that local government faces. Those decisions are no less difficult for ministers. Time and time again, we have acted to ensure that local government receives a fair settlement. We are making very difficult choices to support vital services and it is essential that the funding allocated supports the outcomes that it is intended for. For this Government, that has a clear commitment to improve Scottish education, maintaining increased teacher numbers is fundamental to that. Before I go into detail, I want to place on record my thanks to our colleagues in local government for their dedication to the delivery of a first-class education for our children and young people. For example, we remain close to record levels of teacher numbers and our pupil-teacher ratio remains historically low at 13.2. Last year, we witnessed the biggest single year decrease in the attainment gap in primary numeracy and literacy levels since records began in 2016-17. The 2022 exam results show pass rates for national 5s, higher and advanced hires increased to record levels for any exam year since current qualifications were introduced, while the gap between the attainment levels in the least and most deprived areas has narrowed from the 2019 level. To build on that, we have agreed ambitious stretch aims with local government, which sets out each council's own ambitions for their learners. For overall attainment and closing the poverty-related attainment gap in literacy and numeracy in primary schools, the collective stretch aims of local authorities is for a six to seven percentage point improvement, if achieved, that would amount to the biggest two-year improvement recorded since the introduction of the challenge. As we support this generation to recover from the disruption to their education caused by the pandemic, I am grateful for those sustained efforts and I recognise the importance of strong partnership working between local government, central government and education Scotland to achieve our ambitions. I wish also to address to the current pay dispute and the disruption being experienced by pupils, parents, carers and teachers across Scotland. I wish to provide reassurance to my commitment to work with local government and teaching unions alike to reach a fair, sustainable settlement that is acceptable to all sides. I also want to pay tribute to the dedication, commitment and hard work of our teachers and school support staff and all those who work alongside them. Delivering positive outcomes, including raising attainment and closing the attainment gap, is a shared endeavour in one in which we are making positive progress. A key element of continuing this positive progress is to ensure that there is no reduction in the fundamentals of education delivery, including the number of teachers or support staff and the amount of time that children spend learning in schools. My immediate concern is the threat that the numbers of teachers and support staff may start to fall in the next financial year as a result of council budget decisions, and I wish to avoid such an outcome. Local authorities have historically received funding every year to maintain the pupil teacher ratio, teacher numbers and to provide places on the teacher induction scheme for all probationers who need one. We also provide a further £14.5 million each financial year to fund teacher numbers and pupil support staff. Combined, that funding was made available and agreed with local authorities to deliver on three specific aims. Maintaining teacher numbers at their current levels in the year ahead, maintaining the number of school support staff at the current levels in the year ahead and continuing to ensure that there are places available for probationer teachers who need them on the teacher induction scheme. In the year ahead, where those criterias are not met by a local authority, we will withhold or recoup funding that has been given to local authorities for those purposes. I know that this decision may not be welcomed by local government, but I have a very clear commitment to improve Scottish education, which we are making good progress on. I am firmly of the view that we will not do that by having fewer teachers or support staff or less time in schools. It is vital that we can maintain increased teacher numbers in the context of the difficult budgetary choices that are currently faced by both local government and the Scottish Government, while we work towards the delivery of our commitment to increase teacher numbers by 3,500 by the end of this Parliament. As I have said, I understand the financial pressures facing local authorities and I acknowledge that councils are wrestling with those decisions. Councils have a range of responsibilities and inflationary impacts understandably mean that difficult choices are having to be made. That is why the Scottish Government is committed to delivering fairness in the budget settlement for the next year and a new deal for local government in the longer term. Ministers and cosly leadership continue to discuss how our legitimate and important aim of maintaining teacher numbers can be delivered while respecting local councils' wider priorities that we share. Those discussions will continue both as we finalise next year's budget and beyond. Finally, the current pupil week of around 25 hours for primary pupils and 27.5 hours for secondary pupils is well established. It is the backbone of our education provision and benefits all our children and young people. School not only provides the vital learning our children and young people need to succeed, but it is also a safe and secure place that nurtures them. A reduction to the school week as reported to be considered by some authorities in recent weeks would be expected to materially reduce pupil attainment and wellbeing. That is why I will commence the provision in the Education Scotland Act 2016, which will enable Scottish ministers to set the minimum number of learning hours in a school year. Following thorough consultation, I will then bring forward regulations that will specify the minimum number of learning hours per annum and effectively provide a statutory basis for the pupil week. There is currently some limited variation in delivery across Scotland. That has arisen for a range of reasons. For example, the variation may relate to rural transport requirements to meeting the needs of our youngest pupils or to ensuring that older pupils can access flexible options as part of their senior phase. The regulation making power also anticipates that there would need to be flexibility where pupils' wellbeing requires it and where, for example, matters are outwith education authority or schools control. That variation and the need for flexibility would be fully explored in a consultation and considered before regulations are laid. Those regulations will be subject to affirmative parliamentary procedure. In conclusion, I am committed to ensuring that every child and young person in Scotland has the best opportunities through their education. I am determined that our efforts to accelerate progress on tackling the poverty-related attainment gap will continue. The measures that I have outlined today demonstrate the Government's unyielding commitment to closing the attainment gap and making Scotland the best place in the world to grow up. I will be writing to COSLA today and to each individual council in the coming days to set out the details on protecting teacher and support staff numbers and the next steps on learning hours. Thank you. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would invite those members who would wish to seek to ask a question to please press the request-to-speak button, and I call on Stephen Kerr. This announcement destroys what little good faith still exists between councils and the Scottish Government. The cabinet secretary is threatening councils with sanctions, cutting their budgets even further, for failing to deliver policies that she has failed to provide funding for. There has been a decade of underfunding, and it is hardly surprising that the EIS has announced an escalation of strike action brought about by the cabinet secretary's inaction, including targeting the constituencies of Nicola Sturgeon and Shirley-Anne Somerville. This announcement will bring about deep cuts. Swimming classes will end, youth clubs will close, play groups will close, rural nurseries will close, school cleaning will be reduced, school crossing patrols will end, family support will be cut, school trips will be cancelled, libraries will be closed, services for children from play parks to school meals will get worse. The cabinet secretary is responsible for making our country a poorer place to be a child and a young person. She will not fight for them. All the evidence tells us that she does not fight for children and young people's interests around the cabinet table. Can she honestly say that this announcement will have a positive impact on children in Scotland? In the most challenging of budget settlement since devolution, we have provided £13.2 billion in the local government settlement, and that is an increase of £570 million. That is a real terms increase to local government. I will say, and it probably will not be for the first time, as we go through this. If Mr Kerr is suggesting that more money is given to local government, then he must come, and his party must come, in the middle of this budget process that we are in and give a reasoned and costed way that that can be done. Otherwise, this is bluster in the chamber and no benefit to children and young people. I would point particularly to the work that is going on in the wider Scottish Government to protect children and young people. That, of course, is the Scottish child payment in place because of the ineptitude and deliberate policies of the UK Government to ensure that they are targeting children and young people and not alleviating child poverty. We will do that at the same time as protecting teacher numbers and support staff. We have blind panic in the Government and chaos in council chambers. Labour has been warning this Government on teacher numbers for months, and there was no mention in the red lines in Mr Swinney's budget circular. Now, with days to go until budgets are set, we have fines instead of finance from the cabinet secretary and an immediate ring fencing over one-third of the budgets of local authorities. Chief executives are telling councillors that it is simply not possible to redraw their budgets at this stage. This statement is woeful. It offers zero clarity to parents, pupils, teachers or taxpayers. What is the date for the baseline set for teacher numbers in councils? Why is there no clarity on when regulations will be in place? When will parents know if the school week will change? When? Why did it take until the very last minute for the cabinet secretary to wake up to this problem? There have been a number of times that we have discussed with COSLA at our concern that perhaps the £145.5 million that was put into the budget last year would not provide the numbers. We were, unfortunately, told that it was too difficult to COSLA to provide national government with that information. Therefore, when the teacher census came out, it was immediately apparent to us that an action was taken and discussions continued from then. So, when we are looking for, and it is published in December, if Michael Marra wants another bite of the cherry because he did not ask the sufficient question in the first place, then I am afraid that that is up to him to decide with the Presiding Officer. When it comes to the date when we will look at it, it will be the teacher census because that is the official statistics that are out. I am more than happy to discuss with COSLA if there are other ways that we can do that, but that is the official statistics that we have. When it comes to the school week, I think that I have been very clear in my opening statement about how the Government will take this forward. We will move quickly forward with consultation. The local authorities will be under no doubt the process that we will go through and the fact that we will be protecting the school week as it currently stands, and I would expect therefore councils to pay close attention to the fact that those regulations will be coming into force and due course. I call Graeme Dey to be followed by Megan Gallacher. I thank you, Presiding Officer. Councils are, we are told, signed up to a shared agenda to address the poverty-related attainment gap, and indeed additional monies have been made available via the proposed Scottish Government budget to support all local authorities in that Scotland-wide mission. Can the cabinet secretary advise how the Scottish Government assesses the impact that reducing the school week and teacher numbers would have on those endeavours? Presumably, it was rescending the progress that has been made into reverse. It is of great concern that any reduction in teacher numbers or support staff or a reduction in the school week will have an impact on our ability to tackle the attainment gap. Clearly, and I have said once again our ambition is to substantially eliminate the poverty-related attainment gap by 2026. There is no evidence to suggest that reducing teacher numbers, pupil support staff for the time that children are in school, would do anything but be to the detriment of that policy. That is exactly why we are providing councils and have provided councils with that £145.5 million on that basis. Last week, the cabinet secretary set out four red lines to councils. Those include teacher numbers, length of the school week, pupil support assistance and probationary teachers. I hate to break it to the cabinet secretary, but councils have already made savings in those areas in previous years. Some councils have no choice but to look at the savings to balance the books. As the cabinet secretary is keen to set red lines in education, perhaps she can outline what other savings councils should make to balance the budgets in the face of SNP cuts. We have previously seen an increase in teacher numbers, thanks in great part to the investment that the Scottish Government has put forward on that. Indeed, we have recently seen increases in the number of pupil support assistants. It is very important that we recognise and appreciate that councils have difficult decisions to make. We all do, as we set those budgets. I would simply say to Megan Gallachan and others that, where we have a joint agreement, as we did on the issue of teacher numbers and pupil support staff numbers and where that money has been allocated on that basis, I do not think that it is surprising that the Scottish Government will in follow-up to ensure that that is delivered. That is why the money was put in. It is a shared expectation and an understanding that that would happen. I do not think that it is surprising that we will continue to ensure that those policy decisions are taken to support them. The cabinet secretary set out that additional funding has been provided this year, which was agreed with local authorities that it would be used to recruit teachers and teaching assistants. However, the picture will vary dramatically across the country. What analysis the Scottish Government has carried out is to the extent to which the funding is actually used for its intended purpose, because MSPs in this place will be watching carefully what happens in their local areas. That funding of £145.5 million was baselined into the local government settlement for 2022-23. Therefore, monitoring did not take place specifically on that, but we did keep a very close eye on the summary statistics for schools that were published in December. That is from the teacher census that took place earlier in the year. That is the statistics that are available to ensure that we see an improved picture in the number of teachers. Unfortunately, that did not happen, as I have already mentioned, and, as Mr Doris would expect, the Scottish Government has taken further action, because any further reduction would be wholly unacceptable. I am very grateful, Deputy Presiding Officer. It is a very challenging statement, in its lack of detail. The cabinet secretary has just said that the £145.5 million was not monitored. Is that not because, in fact, the census was not agreed with COSLA as being how it was going to be monitored? Is there a definition of school support staff or is it now pupil support staff? What is the date that the baseline that that will be taken from? There are a significant number of questions here. Will Glasgow be allowed to cut the school week? We have made the commitment to ensure that the school week will be maintained right across Scotland. When it comes to, again, how to measure the number of teachers, there is only one level of national statistics that looks at that, and that is the teacher census. I said that we asked COSLA to work with us in the year to provide further reassurance, but that was not possible. If they are now saying that it is possible that there is a different way of doing that, my door is open to those discussions. They have since suggested that there are more teachers in post than in the census, but they do not actually say and reassure that that is a net position. It is very important that we have a shared understanding of those numbers. That is why the teacher census is national statistics and is the most sensible way to do that. The same is applicable to pupil support assistants, although they will not obviously impart the teacher census, but they are dictated to indifference statistics. We are trying, still at this late point, to work with COSLA to see whether we can get some agreement, even if they do not agree with the decision that I have taken to move forward with the protection of teaching pupil support staff numbers, to ensure that we can agree how that can be monitored and maintained during the year. Cabinet Secretary, despite the damaging effect of inflation in the Scottish budget and the complete inaction from the Tories and Westminster, can you outline how the Scottish Government is prioritising education in the 23-24 budget? We have protected councils in the most challenging budget settlement since devolution. As I said earlier, there is a provision of £13.2 billion in the local government settlement. That is a real-terms increase of 1.3 per cent since the budget act of 2022-23. We now see in 2021, which is the last year that we have statistics for. This was the sixth year in a row that education gross revenue expenditure saw a real-terms increase. That is two demonstrations of how we are attempting, even the most difficult of some circumstances, to provide a fair settlement for the local government and also to ensure that we continue our investment in education. She makes it out as if councils are desperate to cut teacher numbers because they want to damage our schools. The reality is that her government has cut their funding, which has forced them, as she admits, to make incredibly difficult choices. She lectures us every single day that we have to come up with identified funds to fund our spending asks. Where is she doing the same for local government? Is she going to spell out what they should cut? If not, will she withdraw that indictment? I remind members that a bit of polytase does not go wrong. A subsequent referral to the pronoun might be okay, but perhaps initially one could refer to the cabinet secretary just to be a bit more polite. I presume that she means me, Presiding Officer. I will work on that basis. I think that it is very important that I recognise that I have done on my original statement that councils have difficult decisions to make. I do appreciate that we all do as we set our budgets, but I would go back to the point that I made previously and I will make it again for Mr Rennie. Where we have a joint agreement on how money should be spent, I do not think that it is unreasonable that the Scottish Government follows that up to ensure that it is delivered. I appreciate therefore that local government will have difficult decisions to make on the areas where we perhaps do not have a joint agreement about how money should be spent, and that will be a difficult process for them. Where we have a shared understanding, where we have a shared agenda, I do not think that it is surprising that the Scottish Government will follow up to ensure that the policy is delivered. I call John Mason to be followed by Ross Greer. The cabinet secretary emphasised her commitment to working in partnership with local government, and I wonder if she gives some more detail as to how she will work in partnership to reduce the poverty-related attainment gap. There is a great deal of work that is going on in conjunction with local government and in partnership around the poverty-related attainment gap. That is a shared mission that we have against through national and local government. I would point to as one example of that, the Scottish attainment challenge funding that goes through and also the important work that has been developed with local authorities, Education Scotland and national government about the stretch aims. This was a new way of working. This was an innovative and partnership way of working, and I think that we work well together on that, and I look forward to approaching that next year to see how we can continue and indeed build on that. I call Ross Greer to be followed by Rona Mackay. Following on from Bob Dorr's line of questioning, I'm struggling to reconcile the stated purpose of the £145 million that was provided this year with the results of the school staff census outlined by the cabinet secretary and caused a statement in the briefing that they sent to MSPs today that that money was spent on school staff. I can't see how that happened, but the number of school staff actually fell, so could I ask the cabinet secretary what correspondence she's had with COSAL on this and what explanation they've provided as to those two different positions apparently being reconcilable? I note in the COSAL briefing that came out just before my statement that they seem to suggest that it's being spent on teachers, support staff and on pay. I would point to the fact that there was an agreement to ensure that this money was spent on teachers and on support staff. There is additional funding that also goes in around the historical pay settlements that have been made. As I said, the COSAL briefing on that point came up just before the statement. I'm more than happy to follow that up and will of course do so with COSAL and make sure that there's further details that either the local government can provide to us about how that money is being spent or indeed vice versa. We should continue that dialogue. Teacher recruitment and retention is an issue in many rural areas across Scotland, so can I ask the Scottish Government for an update on how it will encourage teachers to work in areas where there's a difficulty recruiting teachers? The member raises a really important point that recruitment and retention is difficult, particularly in some of our rural areas. That can lead to a real challenge in ensuring that teacher numbers are maintained at a particular level. Of course, local authorities are responsible for the recruitment and retention and the deployment of teachers. There are flexibilities in the SNCT for pay arrangements, for example, so a local authority can provide an increase in the salary for teachers if they are facing recruitment challenges. However, I recognise that there is also an important role for the Scottish Government to work with our local authorities to see whether there is anything more that can be done on this issue. We have working groups that look particularly at recruitment and retention, and that particular issue is something that we will be coming back to this year. Cabinet Secretary, once again, here we are, debating a state with no substance and no solutions. Fewer pupils in primary schools are achieving the expected CFE level in literacy, reading, writing, listening, talking and numeracy. That announcement will only lead to the other parts of the education budget being cut. Does the cabinet secretary accept that that will have a negative impact on attainment? If not, what impact does she expect the cuts to have? I go back to the point that we have actually seen an increase in attainment levels, both in numeracy and in literacy at primary levels. That is a real testament to the hard work of our teachers and support staff to recover from the pandemic. However, I would say to Pam Gozel that, if she does not like and thinks that more money should be going to local government, then where will it come from in the budget? It has already been set out. There is an opportunity. We are right in the middle of the budget process, but once again we have another member of the Conservative Party coming forward demanding that more money is spent, but absolutely no detail and no constructive offer to work with the Government on how that could be done. That concludes that ministerial statement. There will be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business, should front bench teams wish to change position.