³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Engagement with the trade unions throughout the process has been fundamental and key to all that we have done. As Mr FitzPatrick will know, I went to Dundee some months ago to meet with the unions directly; the breakdown in the relationship is historical, to some extent, but it has been crystallised by the events in recent months. I have been very keen to meet the trade unions directly every other week to hear from them, to test their thinking, to ensure that the information flow is what they would expect, and to hear their members’ views throughout what has been a challenging time for them and for staff across the university. I want to put that on record, because it has been really challenging for them.

Ministers are here to help and support—that is the role that I have been playing as cabinet secretary, alongside Mr Dey, as minister. Most recently, we met the trade unions last Thursday, and at that point, it felt as though things were in a better space. The VS scheme launched on Friday and I hope that that has helped, too.

Mr Fitzpatrick has raised an issue about the Government’s ability to say something on this matter. We are very keen to say something as soon as we are able to, but we have to respect the processes. As he will understand, this is about public money and, therefore, it is essential that the SFC is able to carry out its work in accordance with its governance processes, regardless of ministers. That needs to be set aside, but we hope to be able to say something as soon as we are able to about the support that we can provide the University of Dundee.

There is a clear focus on reducing teacher workload, but I take the member’s point.

I met the Scottish Council of Independent Schools last year, I think, to talk about some of its concerns, which I have relayed to the UK Government. The UK Government has adopted that policy position, and I have to say that it is one that the Scottish Government supports.

We were originally told that the VAT on that sector would mean consequentials for Scotland—the member has asked me a number of written PQs on that. That seems to have changed in relation to how the budget allocation has been made, so we are now no longer able to make that differentiation. That is quite challenging, because we understood that there would be additional moneys coming to Scotland as a result of that budgetary movement, but that has not been the case.

We have stayed very close to the Scottish Council for Independent Schools throughout and our officials engage with it regularly, and we also engage with COSLA. Although I do not have the numbers to hand, I recently responded to the member’s written PQ with the detail and the data on that.

The issue affects Edinburgh more than other local authorities in Scotland—I know that the member is particularly interested in that—because of the number of young people who are enrolled in the private sector. Our modelling and our understanding is that there is currently capacity in the school estate to absorb any pupils who come out of the private sector. However, if Mr Briggs has examples of where that is not the case, I will be more than happy to hear about those today and to engage directly with the City of Edinburgh Council or other local authorities with cases that he might want to raise.

I am hearing Mr Rennie talk over me. I hear what he is saying. I am well aware of the challenge, because it is put to me regularly. The issue that I face as cabinet secretary is one that we will keep coming back to in this committee, namely that the Government does not employ our teachers. Every education secretary before me has faced the same challenge in relation to how we can get local government to commit to protecting teacher numbers, because we know that that is what makes a difference in our classrooms.

It is worth pointing out that, since 2014, the number of permanent posts has remained static at around 80 per cent. There has also been an increase of 2,500 in the number of teachers in Scotland’s schools, because we are protecting funding for teacher numbers. On what would have happened had we not done that, COSLA’s 2022 budget proposal included a reduction of up to 8,000 teachers. That is not acceptable.

I hear Mr Rennie expressing the anger from the profession. I accept that, and I have taken action. For the academic year 2025-26, the initial teacher education intake for primary school teaching programmes has been reduced by 10 per cent to respond to that exact criticism and that exact point. However, it is not good enough for us to have a continued debate about the Government not acting when the Government cannot employ teachers, so what is the answer to Mr Rennie’s point? We have to work with local authorities. The work that has begun to establish an education and childcare assurance board is part of that. The budget agreement, which was made in good faith, absolutely has to be about not making throwaway comments but putting cold hard cash into the system to employ ASN teachers, ASN specialists, speech and language therapists, educational psychologists or classroom teachers to make a difference. I protected the funding at the national level, and I now expect local authorities to deliver on it locally, as they are elected to do.

I could take further advice from my officials on that. I have no objection to sharing that detail with the committee, and I could provide that in written form following today’s session.

I am sorry to interrupt, convener, but Mr Dey might wish to come in on that point before we move on.

I agree with the sentiment behind Mr Adam’s question. I do not yet know whether there will be an announcement today about lifting the two-child cap, but we know that that would alleviate child poverty at the stroke of a pen. There are many actions that the UK Government could take and I hope that we will hear more about that today. Unless both our Governments work in unison to tackle child poverty, it will not work. We know that the Scottish child payment has been a game changer in ensuring that Scotland’s child poverty levels stay lower than those in other parts of the United Kingdom, but we must see a concerted effort across these islands and must be able to work with the UK Government, so I really hope that we will see more progress from the UK Government to that end today.

We took up that case directly with Orkney Islands Council, which was very clear that what Mr Mason suggests is not what happened. As I understand it from what my officials have said, the issue relates to the movement towards spending 0.1 of the school week on management time, so I am not sure that what Mr Mason said is accurate.

The wider point that Mr Mason raised is live. I did my teacher training in Glasgow many years ago, and I ticked the box that said I was willing to work anywhere in the country, as people will be fed up of hearing.

The preference waiver scheme that we operate, which offers £8,000 to secondary teachers and £6,000 to primary teachers as a golden handshake, is not being taken up in the way that it was before the pandemic. Part of the challenge is that, during the pandemic, we gave probationer teachers a job in their local authority, which I think has fed into the belief that there will be a job for them in their local authority at the end of their training. That has never been the case; it has always been a competitive marketplace. I remember what it was like for me many years ago. I had to apply to a multitude of local authorities across the country, and I had to move.

I accept Mr Mason’s point that moving is much easier for some people than it is for others. If you are single or do not have a family and—to be blunt—you have the money to do it, you can move.

There are other incentives that we need to build on. We need to work with local authorities to encourage people to move to different parts of the country.

We have challenges in Aberdeenshire Council and Highland Council. I have addressed those challenges directly with both local authorities. In the past, local authorities such as Aberdeenshire have worked with us on part funding programmes that encourage people to resettle. Additional funding is available for people who work in rural schools. In the round, in reviewing the probationer scheme, we will have to consider the preference waiver scheme, which we know is not as popular as it arguably should be, if we are to fill the gaps that we accept exist in some of the rural and remote locations that Mr Mason spoke about.

We have talked today in the round about some of the pressures that our teaching workforce face, not least with regard to behaviour, additional support needs and expectations. More broadly, I have engaged substantially with our professional associations on all those points, and they have been key to driving some of the change that we have seen.

The national action plan on behaviour was quite a departure and a shift in tone from the Government on the issue. I do not know to what extent members have reflected on that, but there has been a shift with regard to talking about behaviour in schools. We need to accept that and accept that there is a challenge. I have been up front about that for the past two-and-a-half years, because I know—from my friends who are not politicians and because of my engagement with trade unions and headteachers—how difficult the situation is in schools just now.

Something is happening in our schools in the post-pandemic period. We saw that in the behaviour in Scottish schools research, but we also see it across the world. I alluded to the work that has been done by the UN, changes in behaviour, dysregulation and changes in the type of learning and teaching that we have.

Mr FitzPatrick’s substantive question was about support for teachers, and I have a couple of points to make on that. First, in 2023, I announced the establishment of the new centre for teaching excellence, and we know now that the host institution is Glasgow. In the coming weeks, we will announce opportunities for staff to take part in that centre, which I think will be key. That is an offer to the profession. It is quite unique. It is about pedagogy and excellent learning and teaching. We know that that makes a difference. We have forgotten some of that in recent times, but we need to go back to the bread and butter of quality classroom teaching that makes a difference at the chalk face. The centre for teaching excellence is an offer for teachers to come out of school on secondment and have an opportunity to engage in academic practice, then to go back out into the system.

The second point is about reducing class contact. To me, that is fundamental. We have to free up teachers to engage in the processes of educational improvement and education reform that we want to drive. We will do that by reducing their workload and class contact. In order to deliver that, I have to work through that tripartite structure with our professional associations and, of course, with COSLA. That process has not been without its frustrations—I think that members know that.

The point that Joe FitzPatrick made about teacher numbers is in a similar space. I can talk about how I have protected funding at national level for teacher numbers, but it is challenging when local authorities then decide to take that extra money and make cuts regardless. The budget agreement that we have reached with COSLA was agreed in good faith, so I expect local authorities to go back to 2023 levels, because that is what the budget, with extra funding, provided for. In so doing, councils had to make substantive progress in relation to reducing class contact.

In February, we put a suggestion to the tripartite group about how that might work, but COSLA said it needed more time. I understand that COSLA will come forward with a paper in the coming weeks, before the end of this term, that will contain proposals about how that might work. We need to talk about the practicalities. The arrangement will look a bit different in primary schools, where it will arguably be more challenging to deliver than in secondary schools.

On the broader working relationship, the new education assurance board, which was a key part of the budget agreement, brings the Government and COSLA to the table. We must work together to respond to challenges, whether on teacher permanency, on how we support ASN pupils, or on reducing class contact. We must have a partnership with COSLA or we will not be able to deliver the change that we all want to see in our classrooms.

On the substantive point, I do not want there to be surplus primary school teachers. I would like them all to be in employment—