³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

The Scottish Government remains committed to reducing class contact time, and we will continue to explore with COSLA and the teacher unions, through the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers (SNCT), how best to deliver this commitment.

Local Government are also undertaking local scoping and modelling work to inform delivery of this commitment. This work is scheduled to be completed by summer 2025.

The intention behind the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 is that we have an inclusive approach to Education with a needs-led approach in Scotland.

The Scottish Government remains committed to the inclusive approach to meeting the needs of all young people, in-line with the principles of Getting it Right for Every Child.

The nature of ASN is individual to each child or young person, highly varied, and encompasses a wide range of needs; therefore, some variation should be expected in how this is reported. All children and young people with identified needs which require additional support are entitled to this, they do not require a diagnosis to receive this.

The Audit Scotland review into ASL recommended that the Scottish Government and councils fundamentally evaluate, both nationally and locally, how ASL is planned for, funded and staffed as part of core education provision.

In partnership with our local authority colleagues, we are giving careful consideration to the recommendations set out within the briefing and I am meeting with the Auditor General in the coming weeks to discuss in more detail.

Four organisations submitted a tender to host the Anti-Racism Observatory for Scotland:

1.Edinburgh Innovations Ltd and University of Edinburgh

2.Impact Funding Partners

3.University Court University of Glasgow

4.University of Strathclyde

The bids were evaluated in line with standard procurement processes.

The bid received from the University of Strathclyde, in partnership with the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights, outlined that the Observatory would be hosted at the University of Strathclyde.

Ministerial pay is set and administered by the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government has no role in this. You may, therefore, wish to direct any detailed questions on pay to the Scottish Parliament. A breakdown on Ministerial salaries is provided on the Scottish parliament website - MSP salaries | Scottish Parliament Website.

I can confirm that all Ministers accepted the equalisation of the MSP element of their salary, with the exception of the First Minister who chose not to do so to avoid any perception that he was personally benefiting from his own decisions on Ministerial pay.

Decisions in relation to Exceptional Circumstances and Appeals services for the National Qualifications are an operational matter for the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA).

Figures quoted in a recent media article related to SQA’s Exam Exceptional Circumstances Consideration Service (EECCS). SQA is the only awarding body in the UK that offers an exceptional circumstances service which specifically reviews alternative evidence. It has been designed to offer young people the best opportunity to demonstrate evidence of attainment if their examination experience is impacted by, for example, bereavement, illness or other personal circumstances. This is a pre-certification process, with requests being submitted within 10 working days after the relevant exam. This means that if a young person experiences bereavement or other personal circumstance ahead of an exam, they can ask for alternative evidence to be taken into account when their grade is being determined – whether or not they are able to attend the exam.

The SQA Appeals service is a separate process that takes place following certification for learners who consider they have not achieved their expected results, and involves a marking review of SQA-marked assessments. Candidates who have undergone exceptional circumstances consideration are excluded from the Appeals Service for the same qualification. This is because the EECCS includes a marking review of any/all submitted external assessments that are related to the request.

SQA provided figures in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request from The Herald newspaper on the number of EECCS requests made and cancelled. SQA do not categorise EECCS requests as successful or rejected. It is incorrect to interpret the data as showing that the SQA did not approve over 90% of exam appeals made on the grounds of bereavement.

While SQA may cancel an EECCS request in some circumstances (where, for example, estimates had not been provided, coursework not completed, or a lack of supporting evidence), a larger number of requests are cancelled by the candidate’s centre (school, college or training provider).

For personal circumstances, such as bereavement, the type of EECCS request submitted is determined by the Head of Centre. SQA do not assess the reason for the request or require access to further details regarding the submission. A centre may cancel an EECCS request if they later determine that either there is not a justification for the request, or the alternative evidence available is not sufficient.

To maintain impartiality and fairness, examiners are not provided with any information about the nature of an EECCS request. This is an important safeguard that has been built into the EECCS to ensure that all candidates are treated equally and receive grades based on evidence-based demonstrated attainment against the national standard.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-37627 on 27 May 2025. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at /chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers

NHS 24 have robust practices in place to ensure patient safety is paramount and that the appropriate procedures are in place for assessing risk.

Scottish Government monitor the performance of NHS 24 and regularly engage with the service to discuss performance related issues. Should NHS 24 feel that their ability to meet demand was presenting any risk to patient safety we would expect them to contact Scottish Government immediately in line with agreed processes.

We are working with the UK Government to consider options to potentially streamline Growth Deal governance whilst continuing to ensure a level of scrutiny appropriate to the £3.4 billion of public funding we are collectively investing in the programme. Any changes made to Growth Deal governance would require joint Government endorsement.

There have been no formal requests from the UK Government for collaboration on a second phase of Scottish City and Regional Growth Deals at this time.

We have put a number of measures in place to ensure transparency and accountability in the Growth Deals.

The activities supported by Regional Growth Deals are designed by Local Authorities in consultation with the communities they serve. The decision-making structures supporting the Deals include elected members chosen by communities to serve their areas.

Information on Deal delivery is provided through published annual reports and regular updates on specific projects and programmes, all made available on each individual Growth Deal’s website.