 The next item of business is a debate on motion 2326, in the name of Michael Marra, on action on active ventilation in schools. I would ask all members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons now, and I call on Michael Marra to speak too and to move the motion. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be able to bring this important debate to the chamber today, and I move the motion in my name. On examination of the facts and the overwhelming weight of the data, Labour considers this area of school ventilation to be serious policy failure on behalf of the Scottish Government to date. The number of Covid cases in schools and school closures that are stubbornly difficult for the Government but are physically dangerous for the population. At its most visible, this debate could be said to be about children sat shivering in our schools unable to learn or teachers phrasing in their classrooms unable to teach, but not just today and not just even this year. There are too many children sat at home as their classes or schools are closed due to outbreaks of the virus. That comes after lockdowns and missed education, the impact of which on young people this Government steadfastly refuses to research, quantify and understand. Scotland's Covid infection rates, Deputy Presiding Officer, are highest amongst the under-15s, with seven-day case rates over 400 per 100,000. The circulation of the virus among school children seeds the virus in other settings, and increasingly across Scotland we are seeing cohorts missing class time and schools having to shut to manage the risks. Labour is absolutely clear that we must maintain education in schools. The damage done so far to the prospects of our next generation is already far too great. To maintain school education we must use every strategy possible to make our schools as safe as they possibly can be. In the summer, after over a year of disruption and after several months of Scottish Labour making the case that better ventilation is needed in classroom, the First Minister announced that there was to be a ventilation inspection programme. That was set by £10 million of funding for remedial action. What happened next was not a ventilation programme but CO2 monitors being installed in some but far from all classrooms with a non-existent methodology on how they should be used, resulting in wildly different thresholds being set, all to fill in massive spreadsheets that were sent back to rot on a desk in the Scottish Government's offices. What followed was, by the Minister's own words, a very limited action beyond moving some furniture out of the way of windows and chipping off some paint. Last year, teachers were told to open the window. This year a wee alarm goes off in the corner of the classroom, telling teachers to open the window. What happens if the window is already open when the alarm goes off? Lord only knows. I will give way to the Minister right now if she can tell us by what criteria classroom air quality was judged and the rate of passing failure of the 41,000-inspected classrooms. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to this. Clearly, the local authorities are using different monitors, so they will have different criteria, but the information that comes from the expert advice is around £800 per million, which is a well-ventilated space, but £1,500 per million, if regularly sustained, could be indicated to be purely ventilated. That is an issue that needs to be looked at locally, depending on the monitor usage. Michael Marra. That wide variety, between 800 and 1500, could pick a figure in between, as many councils have had to do. There was no answer in that question about the rate of passing failure of the 41,000-inspected classrooms. We have asked time and again to have that to be produced by Government. We have put in Parliament your questions, and it cannot be provided. There has been no real inspection programme. It has been a useless pretense to get the Government through questions in this chamber, resulting by the Minister's own admission in no action. Research from Harvard University shows that the use of portable air purifiers can reduce transmission rates of airborne viruses by 50 per cent. The use of high-efficiency particulate filters can remove up to 80 per cent of airborne virus. Scottish Labour's proposals follow examples of international best practice and call for the resourcing for two air filters to be installed in every classroom in Scotland. That is the best route to providing robust, active ventilation that will better protect health and, by limiting the spread of the virus, minimise potential further loss of time in schools for our children. It is the correct approach that the Government should back tonight, and it should fund it in the budget. We know that Covid is with us to stay, and teachers are beginning to wonder whether that is now simply going to be the reality of Scottish winter months. I know that the Government is committed to expanding outdoor learning, but I suggest that there are better ways to go about it than bringing the Scottish winter indoors. Are we going to be in the same position a year from now? That Government needs to start building the pandemic infrastructure that we require for domestic vaccine production, regular mass vaccination facilities and staffing of them, a public health system that works, an international vaccine contribution worth the name, and starting today, buildings that can help to keep our children and our teachers and our education staff healthy. In the short term, the advent of the Omicron variant reminds us what anyone watching carefully has known for a very long time. A single-track strategy of high vaccination rates, for that is what the whole of the UK is now pursuing, cannot get case rates down sufficiently to prevent mass circulation and further variants. We must have a tracking system that works and vitally ventilation in our public buildings. I now call the cabinet secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville to speak to and to move amendment 2326.1 up to five minutes, please, cabinet secretary. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I move amendment in our name. In my name, the safety of children and young people, and indeed all education staff, remains our absolute overriding priority, particularly as we approach winter. Ventilation is one of the key lines of defence, along with vaccination, face coverings, good hand hygiene, regular testing and surveillance. At a time when the Omicron variant is causing great concern here and across the world, we must be vigilant and ready to take any action that is necessary. It is true, as the motion sets out, that case rates among the under-15s remain high. To minimise disruption to learning and teaching, it is therefore vital that we make the best use of all the mitigations that we know are effective. As Michael Marra's motion highlights, ensuring all learning and teaching spaces are adequately ventilated is vital, that much we can agree with. It remains one of the most important ways in which we can reduce the risk of airborne Covid transmission and keep our schools as safe as possible. That is why the Scottish Government has worked closely throughout the pandemic with the advisory subgroup on education and child issues, expert bodies such as the health and safety executive and local authorities to put in place an update national guidance on ventilation and CO2 monitoring in schools. We have allocated significant funding to that. Not just the £10 million that Michael Marra mentioned but the £90 million of Covid logistics funding that was provided earlier on in the pandemic, which included support that local authorities did use in some cases and many cases for improving ventilation. That was additionally added to by the £10 million worth of support to ensure that all local authority schools and all day care of children services had access to CO2 monitoring. Around 22,000 CO2 monitors have been purchased today and all initial CO2 assessments of learning teaching and play spaces in Scotland are now complete. That programme of assessment was led by local authorities supported by Government Scottish Government officials and the Scottish Futures Trust. They work collaboratively to assure alignment of best practice. Wherever possible, prior to the October break, every learning teaching and play space had to receive an initial assessment for at least a day under normal occupancy conditions so that readings were properly representative and then continuing in line with the local authorities monitoring strategy thereafter. That exercise was an important step forward in ensuring our understanding of ventilation across the learning estate and we are very grateful for the hard work that was put in to completing those initial assessments drawing on the criteria for acceptable CO2 levels that are set out in Scottish Government guidance. The full operational detail about the outcome of assessments, including the specific number of spaces where areas of concern were identified, is held at a local level, an issue that I have explained to Michael Marra in the past. However, local authorities have been asked throughout the process to provide an overarching feedback on the extent to which CO2 levels exceeded thresholds set out in the guidance. Those align with the expert advice that I have said in my intervention in general. Regular readings of 1,500 per million are indicative of a need to take action in areas of higher assault generation, where, for example, physical education or loud singing is being undertaken, levels of 800 parts per million should be used as a benchmark. Oliver Mundell, thank you for giving way. Is she confident that where those stubbornly high levels have been identified, action has been taken at that local level as she had those reassurances? We continue to seek and receive the reassurances, particularly on this issue. As I was about to go on to say, it was reassuring to receive reports that only in a relative few cases where the recommended CO2 levels exceeded and remedial action was required, a point that I put in writing to the committee recently. Where issues were identified, that is quite rightly for local authorities to focus their remedial efforts. When Michael Marra points out to the fact that little action was taken, it was because local authorities have deemed the level of remedial action that was required and have taken action upon that. Michael Marra— The minister is on record saying that very limited action will be taken. The recommendation is essentially to open a window. Can the minister say whether she expects us to be in this position next year or is she going to do something to prevent us being in this situation come next Christmas? What I have done and what I will continue to do, as I said in my opening remarks, is listening to the experts around this. I encourage Michael Marra to read in great detail the expert evidence that came forward to the committee on this and seek the reassurance that is there about what they have said around the importance of natural ventilation. Actions were undertaken on CO2 readings that were above the detailed levels in the guidance. That did, yes, include repairing windows or identifying inappropriately occupied spaces or perhaps locating to other spaces. In very occasional circumstances, additional fans have been requested and required where no other ventilation was available. That work does continue, and particularly we recognise the challenges over the winter period. Our guidance is very clear that schools need to take and reassure people around the temperature that classrooms are at. That is important about the levels of ventilation and the appropriate temperatures that are taken into account. We will listen very closely to the evidence on air-cleaning devices, but as I again would quote the health and safety executive that has said that the units are not a substitute for ventilation. I will continue to listen to the expert advice and continue to be open to change if the expert advice requires that, but I move the motion amendment in my name. I am grateful to my Labour colleague Michael Marra for bringing forward this important debate and giving Parliament the time to discuss the issue. We will be supporting the Labour motion at decision time this evening because we think that it is time to send a strong message to the SNP Government that they need to step up and do more. I read the cabinet secretary's amendment carefully, and I have listened carefully to what she said so far in the debate. Although I recognise that some action has been taken and I agree that ventilation is only one measure among many mitigations, we cannot support an attempt to downplay the on-going challenges that our schools and therefore our teachers, support staff and pupils are facing. I did not find the response to my intervention particularly reassuring if we are not even able to say that the most basic of remedial actions have been taken and that the Government has followed up on those, it does not seem like we are really on top of the problem. I am also concerned that we are not doing more. I do agree that keeping windows open where possible is important, but for many of our smaller schools, many schools in my constituency, that also means making sure that their heating systems are up to scratch and that local authorities in schools are supported with the considerable additional heating costs that are likely to incur. Would he reflect on the minister's answer to my intervention and ask him whether we are going to be in this situation next year, the schools in his constituency describes? Is it acceptable for us to go to next Christmas and find ourselves in the same position again with kids freezing in classrooms and no active ventilation? Oliver Mundell? I agree with that point, and the sad thing—I was going to come on to it later—is that we should not be in that position this year. I am not a game of thrones fan and I know that other people have been caught out in saying that winter is coming. However, it is true, and we have known for a long time that we were going to be back in this situation. I think that the events of the last week have shown, sadly, that many of the challenges around Covid-19 are not going to disappear, even if we get on top of case numbers, even if we drive forward with the vaccination programme, and some of those measures would just be sensible things to do as a precaution, even if we think on balance that we might be in a better place next winter, because our young people deserve better, their education has been disrupted. If we owe them anything, it is about getting the basics right, and that means delivering on the most proportionate and straightforward measures. That is something that every party in this Parliament should be able to get behind. It might not be the total solution and might not provide all the answers, but it is something that is certainly worth giving a try. If it provides a bit of reassurance to parents, if it provides a bit of reassurance to pupils and if it provides a bit of reassurance to teachers themselves, it would be money well spent and an investment worth making. Cabinet Secretary, can I thank the member for giving way? I suggest what might give reassurance to parents, staff and young people. If we listen to the expert advice, for example, those who appeared in front of Parliament committees and did not in any way suggest the material that is now being suggested in the Labour motion, that is not based on what the health and safety executive are suggesting or the experts that came in front of the committee, so why do not we reassure them by listening to the experts and the advice that the Government is getting? My understanding of the advice is that no-one has said that it would not be an improvement. They have said that it is not the full answer and that there is scientific evidence out there. It is in addition a belt embraces approach that is better than just saying to schools that all you can do is open the window when we know that there are spaces within our schools that are badly ventilated. In many other areas of our society and in the economy, improved mechanical ventilation does form part of the response not just to Covid but to generally improving your quality, so I think that it is worth looking at again. To me, as I seek to close, this whole debate highlights many of the worst qualities of the SNP Government, a Government that makes announcements and believes that its job is done, a Government that fails to understand the magnitude of the issue, a Government that offloads responsibility and blames on to local government, and an SNP Government that is unwilling to admit when its own policies just have not worked, a Government that is not willing to listen to ideas from elsewhere in this chamber. I want to thank Michael Marra for being so assiduous on the issue of ventilation in schools. The debate today will help us to flush out many of the issues at the heart of the ventilation issue. Our knowledge and understanding of the virus has evolved over time, and the Government's response has evolved too. The Government's approach to ventilation must evolve as well, because the current one-size-fits-all approach is just not good enough. When we have a range of school buildings from Victorian to 1960s to the modern designs, the performance of each school differs from the next, yet the Government's policy is very limited. CO2 monitors and opening windows are the only tools in the box. The Government's new business fund for ventilation permits the application from businesses for the purchase of mechanical air purifiers for businesses. The minister might wish to tell us what is the science that backs up that particular support of grant funding that dismisses it for schools, because I would be very interested to hear what the minister has got to say on that. We have made very clear that, if there are areas in school that cannot receive appropriate ventilation, they should not be used or alternative methods can be used. I have said that in my opening remarks, I am happy to say that and clarify it again. Does the science support the use of air purifiers despite the constant dismissals by the minister over repeated occasions? The message out to schools is very clear that the options for them are windows and CO2 monitors. That is the bulk of the activity. The minister says quietly that there are other options available, but those are clearly discouraged by the schools, because I do not know of any circumstances of where air purifiers are being widely used. If it is good enough for businesses and it is explicitly stated in the guidance for businesses and it is not in the Government guidance for schools, then surely it should be good enough for schools. It should have the tools in the box available to them. If you look around the world, the advice is clear. The Irish Government expert group on ventilation recommended that standalone HEPA filters and devices might be useful in reducing airborne transmission in spaces with insufficient ventilation. Calgary board in Canada recommends exactly the same issue. In Australia, the independent Osage group recommends that HEPA filters could be used. In fact, they are encouraged in those countries and discouraged in this country. Back here in this country, Sage member Catherine Knox, professor of environmental engineering for buildings at the University of Leeds, advocated the use where ventilation might need improvement. However, the Government guidance is a straight jacket on schools, limited options and limited tools in the box. Schools should have the funding available to do what is right for their circumstances. It should be explicit that HEPA filters are an option for schools to use rather than the limited guidance that is available. In fact, they have so much credibility that the UK Department for Education and the Department of Health are running a £1.75 million pilot scheme in Bradford to look at what is the most effective use of air purification technologies within schools. They are going much further. The UK Government is actively looking at providing solutions for schools, whereas the Scottish Government keeps on suppressing the options for the schools in this country. We also have a duty to go further. We know that the Omicron variant is posing greater threats to us. The Government needs to step up. It needs to evolve its position and make sure that we are doing the right thing for our schools. We are now almost two years into the pandemic, and yet all that we can offer children and teachers for reason at school is to wear outdoor clothes inside. When we were children, we were always being lectured about wearing our coats inside because we would not get the benefit when we went out, while children today deserve to live their lives in that same way. We knew many months ago that the pandemic was here for the long term. The Scottish Government should have acted then to protect the health of our pupils and staff. It is not reasonable to expect teachers to open a window and crank up the heat and make believe that this is appropriate ventilation for school. Currently, we are facing rising fuel bills, which is putting a strain on local authority budgets. We see pupils who have missed so much school already facing rising Covid numbers in their class. We have an education system in disarray that is failing our young people with the attainment gap widening. It is crucial for those children, especially those children living in difficult circumstances, to get to school. School is often the only place that they can be warm and have a hot meal, and for others, school is their safe place. For some, putting extra clothes on to keep themselves warm inside the classroom simply is not an option. Their clothes are worn and they are fast-out-growing. There is no money at home to replace them far less by warm clothes for a cold, draughty school. Imagine being cold and hungry at home, and then coming to school and being even colder. How can young people learn in those circumstances? Last winter, Caldury and Elin Shear immediately doubled the clothing grant for low-income families to help them to buy additional clothing. The Scottish Government should have done that. Furthermore, this summer, it should have been working on the supply of adequate air purifying equipment to schools in order to keep children and teachers safe and warm this winter. It is normal in Scotland that we have cold weather and storms in the winter. In my constituency, we have seen the impact of storm Irwin on our schools. The pupils and staff of Wick High School had a lucky escape when a huge chunk of the wall was blown off. This is a new Scottish Government flagship school. Sadly, they did not build it to cope with winter weather. Schools must be safe, built to withstand winter weather and places where our children can thrive. Low winter temperatures are already hitting us hard, and children cannot reasonably be expected to learn while sitting in the cold. That is also putting their health at an additional risk, because we know that the cold weakens immune systems and it will lead to a rise in Covid cases. The Scottish Government must not forget that schools are workplaces, and they must adhere to health and safety guidelines in the same way that other workplaces do. The Scottish Government has put £10 million into schemes to improve ventilation in school, but it is not enough, and we know that no two schools are the same. Some are brand new buildings, and other children are still learning and port to cabins. As Willie Rennie said last year, the Scottish Government created a £25 million business ventilation fund. That was the right thing to do, but will it now provide adequate funding for ventilation in our schools for our children? It must act now to keep young people safe and warm so that they can learn. They should not have to wait for another year. Thank you, Presiding Officer. There can be no question that ensuring the safety of children, young people and all educational staff is of paramount importance to everyone in this chamber. I therefore welcome the opportunity to contribute to this afternoon's debate. I thank Michael Marra for raising this important issue, and I thank Shirley-Anne Somerville for the amendment. The importance of this debate highlights the need to follow best Covid advice and to work together to implement mitigations at pace and consistently across Scotland. Anyone who is taught in schools knows only too well that creating a safe, healthy environment is paramount, and school staff are well aware of how to create and maintain safe environments because that is the foundation of health and wellbeing that is necessary for learning and teaching. It makes it fun, lively and sociable for children and young people. Having taught throughout the pandemic myself and keeping in regular contact with educational colleagues, I have some understanding of school environments. Only this morning at the Education and Skills Committee, we heard examples of CO2 monitors being installed in classrooms connected to Wi-Fi and monitored by teachers and department officials centrally. We know that that is happening, not necessarily happening in every council. Michael Marra. I thank the member for taking the intervention. The same evidence, but from the NASUWT, said that actually those CO2 monitors are not available in many classrooms, that they are held centrally and appear occasionally. What kind of evidence are they getting as to when they should take the instruction to open the window? I thank Michael Marra for that. I was just about to go on and I have already said that there is excellent good practice and that best practice needs to be shared with each other to make the most of the Scottish Government £10 million funding that councils have already received. I note a few members, including Willie Rennie and I think Rhoda Grant, on the variants of school buildings. Of course, had councils not been saddled with Tory-inspired and labour-backed private finance, we would have modernised schools and we would have more revenue in the education budget for councils to go even further. Promises that were made for schools that were meant to be fit for the 21st century failed at that time to include CO2 monitoring. I thank the member for giving way, but how does she explain to constituents in Dumfries, who are sat right now in the high school, when her Government has been in power for 14 years and that building is not wind and water type? Surely that is not acceptable. I thank Mr Mundell for that intervention. I remember that it was 20 years ago when I stood at a Hustings and I was talking about PFI and I was accused as a teacher of trying to take away new buildings from schools. I said at that time that we were mortgaging our children's future and that is exactly what we have done. In Glasgow alone, 10 per cent of the education budget is still paying for PFI mortgages. We can build a co-operative approach to working-out solutions with council officers, teachers and education representatives working together in the spirit of a fair work approach. We can ensure that necessary adaptations are made to our school estates and implemented to inevitably meet the ever-changing health and safety guidelines as we respond to Covid. It is welcome to hear from education representatives such as Larry Flanagan, the general secretary of the EIS, who, from a survey reported from his members that, in the majority of schools, our members fail that ventilation issues are being addressed. As members know, the Scottish Government's guidance continues to be informed by the advisory subgroup on education and children's issues, as well as health and safety executives. I have spoken to former colleagues and teachers and head teachers alike, and I have to say that, in the majority of cases, I would concur that mitigations and adaptations are taking place. I thank our colleagues in the education centre for their continuing hard work. I am grateful for the chance to contribute to this afternoon's debate. The unmistakable truth is that, while we have made good progress in our battle against the pandemic, the virus sadly is still very much with us. With extended school closures, mask mandates along with banned sports days and nursery graduations, the pandemic took its toll on children's education and mental health. Sadly, it continues to do so even today. We now need to learn to live with such happenings, and therefore we need to be better prepared. The virus is here to stay. With winter fast approaching, we need to be taking proactive approach, not a reactive approach to the issues facing our schools right now. Later on, we will be far too late. In order to combat the transmission of the virus, good ventilation is needed. Every classroom and every school across Scotland, the advisory subgroup on education and children's issues recommended that greater emphasis should be placed on ventilation by keeping windows and doors open as much as possible. That advice was again repeated as pupils returned back to classrooms. That is not ideal, given the low temperatures during the winter months. Whilst measures to improve ventilation are just one method of mitigation in schools, they are increasingly important ones, one that can keep our schools safe as possible. Scottish Government ministers repeatedly failed to publish information on the rate of failure and the criteria of their ventilation inspection scheme. Once again, it has taken the opposition parties to draw attention to the issue. Yes, the Scottish Government has given 10 million to local authorities in addition to the 90 million for remedial actions, like dealing with CO2 monitoring exercises, but there must be significant investment to ensure the protection for pupils and staff for long-term. We cannot overlook three important issues. First, without adequate ventilation systems in classrooms, children will continue to take the virus home to their parents and elderly relatives. Secondly, the mental health of our children must be at the heart of the future Government strategies. Lastly, but certainly not least, the attainment gap is wider than it has been in any year since 2017, with a staggering 22.1 per cent gap between the most deprived and the least deprived pupils in A-grade attainment levels. In closing, Presiding Officer, we must do everything that we can to ensure that the entire generation of children cannot be lost as a Covid generation. We need a proactive, long-term approach to live with the virus, not a sticky, plaster approach that we all know that SNP is good at, or will the SNP Government still be using Covid as an excuse for their mismanagement on Scottish education in the next 10 years' time? I am very glad that such a motion has been brought before the Scottish Parliament today, and I am delighted to back that motion. The infrastructure supporting our children's education is just as important as education itself. That goes for the mental health and wellbeing of teachers and staff as well. That is our chance to put it right. I call Fulton MacGregor to be followed by Ross Greer. That is a very important issue, and I thank the Labour Party for bringing it forward today, and I mean that genuinely. As others have said, there are already many mitigations in education settings across the country, such as the continued use of face coverings in communal areas and secondary classrooms. I was glad to hear that the UK Government recently took to follow a lead on that. An on-going focus on good ventilation and good hygiene, regular asymptomatic testing for school staff and secondary pupils, and on-going surveillance and outbreak management in partnership with local health protection teams. I understand that North Lanarkshire, where my constituency has the extensive guidance, has been published in line with the national guidance, and a toolkit was prepared to ensure that the following areas were covered, including social distancing protocols, use of PPE and face coverings, public transport versus school transport, catering and cleaning arrangements, drop-offs, staggered starts and walking buses, movement of pupils around school, curricular arrangements and timetable, and arrangements for shielded staff and pupils. As a dad with a child at the school and one at nursery, I can confirm that a lot of those measures are in place, masks at the school gates, for example, staff wearing face coverings are pretty standard now, and staggered drop-off and pickup times. Indeed, there was a mini celebration in our house when we got the 9am start slot for this term, as opposed to the quarter to nine at the end of the last. I know that I'm sure that many here will agree and will look particularly at Neil Gray, I think. We'll appreciate that that extra 15 minutes is absolutely vital in the morning in a house full of kids. I'm not going in just because of the amount of time I've got some things I want to say. As others have said, the Scottish Government has allocated an additional £10 million to local authorities to ensure that schools and childcare settings have access to co2 monitoring. I'm aware from an FOI request that North Lancer Council purchase and distributed £1,000 co2 monitors in September with £85,000 spent on them, and I think that that seems like a necessary spend. I'm not, I have to say, against the use of HEPA filters, and I think that Willie Rennie actually made quite a compelling case earlier, but I do also think that the Government have made it quite clear that we need more research, the doors are not closed in this, but for now I think it's sensible that we do open more windows, especially high-level ones, and allow for more flexibility with clothing during the winter months, as much as people might have disagreement with that. I think it is sensible mitigations, but I also do think, Presiding Officer, this is where I really want to focus, my contribution. I do think that we are missing an opportunity, something else that's not really been overly talked about today, to do something fundamentally different. And how often have we talked about building back better from the pandemic? What does that mean for each sector? Well, in education, why are we not radically increasing the use of outdoor learning? We know that it's being outdoors is safer and lowers the risk of Covid. We also know that it's good for young people. To me, it seems like a win-win. I know that the Government will say that they are promoting outdoor education, and they are, in some of the work in the early years' settings, is absolutely fantastic, but I don't think that in schools that are going far enough yet, even by giving all children an extra hour outdoors, the risk in a population basis could be radically reduced as well as improving outcomes for young people. And the way there isn't an excuse, you know, I know it's maybe not the most popular time to be saying this, but last term, last parliamentary term, I think about 2019, I met with representatives of the outdoor kindergarten sector in Norway, some areas of a country that are freezing temperatures in no daylight at certain points in the year, and yet their children are thriving throughout their education in an outdoor education-based model. So I do ask the Scottish Government to be bolder and consider these other models and go further and make sure that our legacy on the other side of the pandemic isn't just about high-tech air filters, vaccines for children in mass and classrooms. It's important that all those things are just now at this stage, but it's a radical and evidence-based approach to education with safe outdoor learning at its core. My thanks to Michael Marra and the Labour Group for bringing this issue, for a debate. It's one that I've raised a number of times in this chamber, including with the First Minister and the Education Secretary. I'm a little bit confused about exactly what Labour wants to achieve, and I will come back to that later on, but I think that this has been, continues to be, a useful opportunity for us to air these issues. We first discussed the issue of ventilation in schools over a year ago now, after they returned to something approaching normal after the first period of lockdown. It was during a debate that I led on the safety issues facing school staff and pupils. Ian Gray moved an amendment to my motion, inserting a request that the Scottish Government investigate the possibility of resourcing ventilation improvements in the school estate. Months then passed before there was any significant progress on the issue across the country. Now, some local authorities didn't wait. I think that the example that Cokab Stewart mentioned of a network of CO2 monitors in schools in South Lanarkshire have been a real example of best practice in this area. However, the Scottish Government's announcement of £10 million of funding for CO2 monitors and the inspection regime generated activity from those local authorities who dragged their heels for six months or longer. However, although I understand entirely the supply and the other logistical issues that they faced, the timescale in which that work took place just wasn't good enough, CO2 monitoring can only usefully take place when classrooms are at normal capacity, so it couldn't take place over the summer holidays. That should have resulted in a drive to do as much monitoring as possible before schools broke up at the end of June. Staff and pupils should have returned to schools in August with the required ventilation improvements and monitoring systems in place. Instead, it was early November before all inspections had taken place and the monitoring equipment purchased was fully deployed—that's the equipment from the £10 million. That wasn't good enough and I have no doubt it contributed towards the spike in infections that we saw amongst young people across late August and early September. Where I struggle with the motion is that those inspections have now taken place. Monitoring equipment is now in place in every school and various improvements have been made. I am just about to cover a point that I think might be of what Mr Mundell is going to intervene on. If he feels that I have missed it, please do intervene again. If that motion had been brought in June or August, but I would regularly raise the issue in the chamber, I would have completely understood why. If it had been brought in September or October, so after my party entered government in case the members think that that is what I am implying, I would have still completely understood why. However, in speaking to staff unions in recent days, I do not think that the motion matches where the concerns now are. Again, Labour is right to have brought the issue of ventilation to debate because there are still issues. As the education committee heard this morning, there is a gap between guidance and reality on accessing co2 monitors. Technically having access to a monitor, because yours is one of the many classrooms that it has been assigned to, is not the same as being able to deploy one whenever you feel it is necessary. The Government amendment notes that the guidance requires local authorities to ensure that schools have access to co2 monitors. If the cabinet secretary could expand on that in her closing remarks, I think that I have time to understand the tension between producing guidance. I suppose that the provision of co2 monitors for those schools, the only mitigation measure that is available is opening the window. Does the member think that we should still be in this situation again next year, with freezing cold classrooms, and maintaining a £400 case rate per 100,000 in schools under 15 population, because we are doing nothing more to sort the situation? I do not think that we should be here this time next winter, but I do not think that all the responsibility for this lies with the Scottish Government. Local authorities will have a year in which they can make necessary improvements. I understand the tension between producing guidance, which is specific enough to be effective and flexible enough to be applicable in a variety of settings, but I wonder if a minimum ratio could be considered for mobile monitors to the spaces that they are assigned to. Another area of concern reported to me by teachers in recent weeks has been poor dissemination of the guidance to all school staff. Again, I would appreciate if the cabinet secretary could clarify what the Government believes its role is in ensuring that the guidance is reaching front-line staff. I have heard of instances a number of times in recent weeks where they are simply unsure as to what they should do when a co2 monitor indicates that a breach has been reached. I call Paul O'Kane to be followed by Alexander Stewart. I rise in support of the motion in Michael Marra's name. As Scottish Labour spokesperson for public health, it is clear to me that more active ventilation in our schools is crucial in our continued efforts to reduce transmission of Covid-19 and that the action of the Scottish Government in this area thus far has been lacking. Society expects public health measures to be at the front and centre of ensuring that buildings such as schools are safe for pupils and staff and that we all have confidence in the environments that are used day in and day out, not only for learning for our young people but for wider community use and our civic life. Rigidus systems are in place around water, sanitation and hygiene. We must now invest in systems that provide long-term, robust active ventilation across all of our school estates. As we have heard many times already in the debate this afternoon, we cannot simply be in the situation of opening a window next year or the year after. It is clear that we cannot tackle Covid-19 with a one-track strategy. We need a basket of measures in line with an overarching public health approach. Of course, vaccinations are incredibly vital in protecting people's health, but vaccines alone are not enough. Science has shown repeatedly that proper ventilation is one of the most effective ways to prevent infection due to the aerosol nature of Covid-19. We must have safe environments for our young people to learn in. That is why the motion advocates at least two HEPA filters in each classroom in Scotland because we have heard that they have been employed elsewhere in the world and that they have been advocated by the Government in other settings. It is clear that the work undertaken to date by the Government has not been sufficient. The CO2 monitoring that the Government has persevered with has no standardised approach. It is a methodology that it has refused to share and it was delayed anyway. It has done nothing apart from clinging to this incompetent approach, which has wasted money, I believe, and time on CO2 monitors alone. It has left us nowhere closer to a long-lasting solution. It has also done little to inspire confidence from young people, parents and staff, and confidence in our public buildings and in the places where we live and work and learn and play is so crucial, as I mentioned earlier. This morning, I received a copy of the results of some survey work, which has been done on a wellbeing group of almost 400 teachers from across Scotland. 31 per cent report that they still have no CO2 monitor, 30 per cent have one that is shared throughout the school building. Of the teachers who have access to CO2 monitors, 10 per cent say that they have had it for only one day. Many teachers are reporting that the windows and opening the windows are the only means of ventilation, although they often teach in rooms that do not have windows. Of 102 teachers who have a CO2 monitor, 11.8 per cent report that it is frequently read and 43 per cent say that it is sometimes read. Indeed, those teachers have also reported classrooms being uncomfortably cold as we enter some of the worst of the winter weather. Whilst opening windows on paper is an attractive and easy way to achieve ventilation, it really is not working in practice. Not only are classrooms and learning spaces freezing, but cases are still rising, so clearly not enough action. Pueblo's parents and staff I think deserve better, and so do local authorities who are struggling to get this right in a variety of buildings and spaces. Of course, I declare an interest, Presiding Officer, as a serving councillor in East Renfrewshire. The money that has so far went to local authorities to take part in the monitoring has not been needs-based, and instead of funding what was really needed, the money was mainstreamed with no clear methodology as to its allocation. It is clear, Presiding Officer, that what is required is a strong public health approach with consistency of funding and implementation. I believe that it is time for some urgency from this Government. Twenty months into the pandemic, it is clear that young people, staff and parents to local authorities deserve better. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, which, at its core, is about the importance of protecting young people's education. We know that, even though young people are unlikely to become seriously ill from Covid, every day of school that young people miss due to the virus does yet further damage to their education. Given the lengthy periods of school closures that young people have already had to endure, further potential losses of education are unacceptable. We know that it is, with many aspects of the pandemic, that it is children from the most deprived backgrounds whose education is most likely to be affected by Covid. When schools were open, analysts were to find that a double percentage of the most deprived children had affected on school compared to those of the least deprived children. Around 4 per cent of the most deprived pupils were affected from the Covid-related to 2 per cent from the least deprived children. While there is often school attendance gap between the poorest pupils and the most well-off, Covid resulted in the gap even growing wider. What is at demonstrates is the importance of ensuring that school settings are made as safe as possible, and on this issue the Scottish Government has a rather mixed record. The introduction of asymptomatic testing for teachers last year was much welcomed, however the regular testing of school pupils that should have followed on from that did not arrive until much later. Similarly, when we talk about ventilation, which is about this debate, the Government has failed to take definitive action on the issue, despite concerns already being raised repeatedly months before. One teacher's union has already indicated that the Government's guidance on ventilation consists of nothing more than opening windows. We have heard today that school should have been allowed to monitor much earlier, and the guidance that they have for them is still causing some concerns across school estates. Of course, it is true that some evidence suggests that school environments are relatively Covid safe and, due to the community transmission that takes place, however, the evidence was much predates many of the Alpha and the Delta variants, and the new Omicron variant, we do not know how that variant will work. Given much more evidence is required before we know about ventilation and the preparation that takes place, it is important that the Government takes action and does not fail our pupils and fail our schools. It is this time last year that the Scottish Government was facing numerous calls on issues about school safety when it came to this direction. Calls for this was about testing national strategy, protecting school staff who had chronic underlying health conditions. Parliament even debated motions called this time last year, but much has not taken place and little action has taken place in the time. Fast-forward to where we are today, a year on, the evidence has not changed yet there is still spending parliamentary time debating the SNP's failures to keep schools safe as possible. We want our schools to be safe, we want our pupils to be protected. As such has one, we have already seen that there are changes in this variant, there are changes in what is happening, so it is important that the Government listens to the evidence, that they listen to Parliament, that they take action to ensure that this virus is not given yet another opportunity to damage young people's education. I want to say from the outset that this is an incredibly important debate and it is absolutely right that the issues raised in the motion should be discussed. As the motion points out, Covid-19 transmission is currently highest amongst under-15s and that is in part testament to the success of the vaccination programme in the other age groups, and it is also a consequence of the fact that schools are busy places filled with people who have as yet not been vaccinated. Although the GCVI advice develops in the roll-out of the vaccine proceeds, this may change. They have that sense, youngsters have that sense of invulnerability that comes with youth and perhaps less of a concern about the implications of catching the virus. All of that means that there is a risk of transmission. We need to mitigate the risk as much as possible, and that is why the baseline protections must be adhered to at all costs. The alternative to mitigating the risks is that we shut schools again, and anyone with any delusion as to what the response to that decision might be can look at the comments on the Facebook page of the courier, which was posted this morning. I have no idea whether there is any consideration of schools closing early over Christmas holidays, but it was a post that was run by the courier, and the response from parents was absolutely no thank you, but kids must stay in their school as long as possible, which I have to say that I would agree with. Everything about the response to this global pandemic is about balances, about keeping in tension the protections that are needed to prevent the spread of the virus, while at the same time enabling people to live as normal life as possible. Closing schools would have a massive implication on parents' ability to work, as well as further impact it would have on the education and social development of the job. I thank Jim Fairlie for giving way. Does he not agree that this is one of those balances, that this is an extra protection, an extra measure and extra resource that we can provide to schools? Is that not a good thing? Jim Fairlie? I would absolutely say that this is something else, but there are lots of measures that we have in place, such as vaccinations, masks, hand washing, keeping parents out of schools. All those things are there to help us to make sure that we control the virus, but we need to keep the schools open. As I have said, to do that we need to mitigate the risk of infection as much as possible. There is absolutely no doubt that the increased ventilation is certainly one of the most important ways of doing that, and in the face of it one of the most simple things is to open windows or doors. Of course, there is a balance that has to be struck between ventilating schools and classrooms by opening windows and doors versus comfort and safety, something that is particularly relevant now that we are firmly into winter. Indeed, appropriate solutions will depend heavily on local factors, including building design, location and prevailing weather conditions. Some school buildings may have been designed to allow for simply swinging open doors, others will not. Aging conditions are a factor in schools, and sometimes you have windows that are painted shut that have been for over years. There are no easy fixes, and practical decisions on how to implement and improve ventilation are best left to the localised decision making. That is why I have a problem with the prescriptive element at the end of the motion. Insisting on a baseline of at least two heap of filters in each classroom in Scotland sounds good, but it simply may not be the most appropriate approach to the most sensible solution for an individual school. One of the most important ways of ensuring whether ventilation in a room is sufficient is by the use of the CO2 monitors. I am on the Covid recovery committee, and we have taken evidence about ventilation on various occasions. Surprisingly, experts keep coming back and saying to us that the best thing that we can do is open a window. It is very simple and very easy. I know that that is going to cause problems, but the point that my colleague behind me said about allowing kids to get their outdoor learning experience is that this is an opportunity to really develop that sort of stuff. I am going to finish. Ventilation in our schools is a pretty important mitigation. I am going to leave the last word to Larry Flanagan, the general secretary of the EIS. Ventilation is critical. This is his quote. Ventilation is critical as we go into the winter. We have made good progress recently, and there are stronger consensus in the importance of ventilation. Importantly, he said, I note that in the majority of schools, our members feel that the ventilating ventilation issues have been addressed. We now move to closing speeches, and I call on Megan Gallacher up to four minutes, please. Before I continue, I would like to refer members to my register of interests as I am a servant councillor in North Lanarkshire. Today's debate has highlighted the need to deliver on urgent improvements to ventilation facilities in our schools. The chamber has repeatedly raised concerns over the inadequacy of ventilation systems in public buildings, and yet, despite those warnings, little action overall has been taken by the SNP Government. The pandemic has changed how young people are educated, and that includes how school buildings are utilised. Teachers in pupils need proper ventilation to help to suppress the spread of the Covid-19 virus. Although the Government distributed £10 million to local authorities to improve ventilation—and that is, of course, welcomed—we have yet to see exactly what adjustments all councils have made. That, despite the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, stating on 13 July that ventilation and implications of airborne transmission are increasingly key parts of our decision making and that she would keep Parliament updated on the Scottish Government's work on ventilation. The minimal updates that Parliament has received from this Government outlines a delay in funding to local authorities. The cabinet secretary even admitted that the action that is being taken by Scottish councils to improve ventilation in schools has, in the main, been very small. Statements such as that do not fill teachers, parents or pupils with any comfort or knowledge that their schools are properly ventilated. As Oliver Mundell rightly said, the Scottish Government is filled to understand the magnitude of this issue and has shifted the responsibility on to councils and leaving them to go alone. I would like to touch on some of the contributions that were made in the chamber today. Michael Marra reminded the chamber of the risk that our young people face by not having good ventilation. It was interesting to see the exchange between Mr Marra and the cabinet secretary regarding the adaptations that councils have made that further suggested that the Scottish Government does not have further ideas than Windows and CO2 monitors and, as Wittley Rennie outlined, the UK Government and others are looking beyond the basics for solutions. He is right when he says that we must do the same. Pam Goswell mentioned the importance of mental health and how we need to ensure that we have buildings that are fit for purpose. Ross Greer mentioned better guidance that allows councils to prepare and that we could outline better measures more effectively. That is something that the Scottish Government should look into. Fulton MacGregor mentioned the measures that North Lanarkshire Council has taken. I welcome his willingness to look at other measures to improve educational experiences for young people. I also agree that the Scottish Government must be bolder when looking at adapting school buildings. After all, the SNP has had every opportunity to provide members with an update on the Ventilation Fund roll-out to reassure parents and pupils that their safety was at the forefront of the pandemic. That would have allowed for debate and discussion that we are having today. Given the recent news of the new Omicron variant, the Scottish Government must get a grip of that on-going issue. It is not good enough to tell Parliament that they have tried to improve ventilation by giving councils funding but not following it up to provide members of the public with confidence that a young person should attend school that they are learning in a safe environment. To conclude, the SNP has failed to understand the importance of ventilation in our schools. The consequence of that is meant delays and no real understanding of the progress made by local authorities. Teachers, pupils and school staff deserve to be able to work and learn in a well-ventilated environment, safe in the knowledge that this Government has acted to introduce measures that will help to prevent the spread of the virus. I urge the Cabinet Secretary to get a grip of the issue and to provide much-needed reassurance that our schools will be properly ventilated as we continue to navigate through the pandemic. We can all agree that everyone in the chamber today wants to make our schools as safe as possible. We have a great deal of consensus on that, and I would like to work on that basis. Although I have to admit that it is difficult sometimes to listen to the Conservatives who have motioned over many months that we should be taking away mitigation measures that we currently have placed in schools, despite the cautious approach of this Government. I have listened very carefully to what the Labour motion has said and what the Labour speakers have said today, but I would still reiterate that this is not what experts are advising. Read the evidence from the Covid committee, this is not what the advice said. Look at what SAGE and the health and safety executives have said on air-for-child and air-filtration devices, which are only to be used where natural mechanical ventilation cannot be improved and should never be used as a substitute for efforts to improve ventilation. The Scottish Government is not an outlier on this issue. Guidance on England and Wales is also clear that natural ventilation is necessary. We are taking an evidence-based approach to policymaking and we are listening to the experts. Of course, we will keep our guidance under review and we will always look at evolving research on this issue, as every Government rightly should. However, the current guidance is based on the available evidence, which supports a primary focus on improving natural ventilation with CO2 monitoring and helping to identify areas of concern. Indeed, the health and safety executive guidance on air-cleaning devices said that those units are not a substitute for ventilation and should prioritise any areas that are identified as poorly ventilated for improvement in other ways, before we think about using an air-cleaning device. How does that marry with the point that has been raised in this debate, that those devices have been made available to other parts of society and other parts of the economy? Why are schools any less deserving? I have laid out exactly the evidence that we are listening to on the issue. Our guidance makes clear that schools do not just need to look at ventilation but that they also need to ensure that their appropriate temperatures are being maintained, and the guidance refers to all applicable regulations on that. The guidance is there for everyone to see on that. If there are areas of local concern—we have the Workforce Issues Group, chaired by COSLA—that unions sit on, and unions have been specifically asked to give specifics in-conferensive, required and none have been given. However, I reiterate the point that has been made by my officials in those meetings that, of any union, have specific concerns that have been able to be sorted out at a local level. We are more than happy to look at that in-conferensive necessary to be able to ensure that people have faith in what is happening. There is a great deal of winter planning that is going on, and we are working with local authorities to do that. We are, of course, very much looking at on-going monitoring as well, to ensure that there is a suitable longer-term strategy in place for monitoring and the assessment of ventilation. Ross Greer's point, for example, on the potential of ratios of monitors to space, is that I understand one of the approaches that is being discussed among others, and those will continue to be looked at. We will give serious consideration, of course, if the advice changes on the aspects around ventilation and on what needs to be done. However, I would go back in conclusion to the point that nothing in the Labour motion is relating to the evidence that is coming up if we are looking at an evidence-based policy approach to what the experts are suggesting that we do. I am very keen that we work together to ensure that our learning teaching in place bases are safe and well ventilated. We will continue to be informed by that expert advice and analysis, making any improvements where necessary. I am committed to working across the chamber on that issue, but let us do that on the basis of the experts and the evidence that comes up from that. I will gladly work with Labour or, indeed, any other party to ensure that there are improvements to be made. We will make them, building on the progress that we have already made to ensure that schools are as safe as they can be. I call on Martin Whitfield to wind up up to five minutes, please, Mr Whitfield. I am very grateful, Presiding Officer, and it is a great pleasure to close this debate. It has indeed been a debate with interventions and questions and answers and considerations, which is good to see. A number of speakers have highlighted the importance of this motion, which is talking about the safety of our children, the safety of the staff and the safety of the parents when they go into our schools. Schools that are fulfilling a dual role at the minute want the need to remain open from an economic standpoint for the parents, which was so rightfully pointed out by some speakers, but also, and I would say actually more importantly, it is the steady rock for our children. It is that place where they can feel confident and safe, where they can feel warm and well fed, and where they can do the development that we need them to do and we owe it to them to allow them to do as they grow up. But there are two elements within this motion that I think are very important and it has been skirted around to some extent and that is in relation to the CO2 monitors being one part of a sole way of solving a ventilation problem, the other being just open the window. The CO2 monitors do nothing about Covid. They do not measure Covid in the classroom. CO2 monitors measure carbon dioxide. They have existed as measures within our buildings for a significant number of years. Indeed, if we go back to 2018, when the consultation was taking place on amending the school building regulations, a number of people, particularly from local authority respondents, replied, that there is a direct correlation that was seen between good ventilation and effective teaching and learning and a concern that in many new schools CO2 levels are higher than recommended because there is enormous evidence to show that those children who come complaining in the afternoon of headaches, those children who come complaining just before lunch because the classroom is stuffy, they are not learning and the CO2 is pointing out that there is a fault in the amount of air that needs to flow in and out of an environment for a young person to learn. Indeed, in the regulations it requires two complete changes of air within a classroom every hour. So this is a problem that predates Covid. We have owed it to our young people for a significant number of times to improve their learning environment. It was interesting to see in this debate that that was starting in part to be opened up. Then we come to the inspection criteria. It was right for us to point out the differing advice that is coming from it. The other area that I have concern about is the use of CO2 monitoring results throughout a day in a high school in particular, where sometimes that classroom is empty. Surprise, surprise, the CO2 buzzer won't go off, but it's still part of the average that's taken to ascertain whether the particles in the air are within the 800 or 1500. I was grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for pointing out that the figure is 800. Indeed, Dr Patrick Roach, the General Secretary of NSW, pointed out that there is still a problem at local level about whether it is 800 parts per million or indeed 1500 parts per million, and there seems to be confusion about that. It was right that the Cabinet Secretary said that the full operational data is held at a local level. Can I suggest that that's a disappointment? If it was held at central government level, if you were able to assess how many of our classroom spaces were falling short, you would have a far better idea of the extent of the problem that's challenging our children in being at school, that's challenging our teachers and our support workers in school, and also those people who are providing lunches. It was a joy to hear a number of the speeches today, and I apologize for there not being sufficient time to raise a number of the points that I'd have liked to, but I wanted to highlight Roder's Grant's comment about the fact that poverty is a real problem for children in school, particularly coming with the advice that when the buzzer goes off, open the window, or indeed, as one teacher said to me, if the buzzer goes off and your windows are open, if you hold it outside the window for a bit, it will go off and then you can go back to work. But the poverty that exists for groups of children, and this was also highlighted, very clearly by Alexander Stewart, that it is the most deprived children that have suffered during this time, and it is to them we owe them the most. So, to come to conclusion, this is an important motion, it raises very important issues, not about a completely different way of solving the problem, but putting another item in the armory of those who are trying to keep our children at school to keep those classrooms safe, and perhaps it's something we should look at very severely going forward, is to the quality of buildings. I'm not sure the answer is throw them outside to experience forest learning in December. That can come and should come, but needs to be planned for. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Thank you. That concludes the debate on active ventilation in schools. It's now time to move on to the next item of business.