Paul O'Kane
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“It is clear that any ban on phones will have to involve young people. They will have to help to co-design it and they will have to be at the heart of how we implement it—we should not forget that in the debate. There are already myriad discussions about how we might do that.”
“That is why we have advocated for a national charter on behaviour and standards and national leadership on discipline in schools, to empower headteachers to set out consequences, look at the issue of community partners such as campus cops and restore the relationships that now do not exist in many local authorities.”
“I am pleased to contribute to the debate, and in doing so, I thank Pam Gosal for bringing the issue to the chamber, and I wish her well. Pam was one of the first MSPs I met when I was elected to this place; we were in the same little group on the first day.”
“I am sure that many of us who watched the first day of proceedings in 1999 never thought that we would sit in the chamber and help to form the next part of the story of the Scottish Parliament.”
“Her work with me and others across committees on drug deaths and drug harms was very important. I hope that we will all continue to focus on that in the next session of Parliament. She can be assured that her contribution in that space is very valued. I also pay tribute to you, Deputy Presiding Officer.”
“Given that it is the last day of the parliamentary session and that we are about to enter an election period, colleagues will expect some politics from me. It is clear that the Government has failed to grip these issues during this session.”
The complete record
Every one of 463 lines we hold for Paul O'Kane, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 10.
“Therefore, I reassure Mr Balfour and other members that the matters that are put forward in his amendments are being considered, or are best considered, administratively, and I will explain why. To ensure that that happens, I advise the Parliament that, as Mr Balfour and I agreed at the end of last week, I will arrange a meeting involving him, charities and organisations representing disabled people, Scottish Government officials, the Student Awards Agency Scotland and the SFC before the Parliament is dissolved at the end of March, so that further discussions can take place. Mr Balfour and I would welcome the involvement in that meeting of any other members who have an interest in the matter.”
“I want to mention the points that Jeremy Balfour made about the importance of inclusion and of ensuring that lived experience is involved in the formation of policy. We in the Government appreciate that people with support needs and disabilities are, at present, less likely to be economically active than others, and we are constantly exploring what more Government and its agencies might be able to do to change that. I know that Jeremy Balfour has been engaged in that matter for many years. The Scottish Government is firmly committed to building a fairer Scotland in which people can access the support that they need to fulfil their potential in post-school education and training.”
“We must continue to work together to hold the Government of the day to account for its actions, but I think that we need to build the policy consensus rather than trying to legislate for something in primary legislation. I will leave my comments there. I am sure that we will hear more from the minister and Mr Balfour. Ben Macpherson: I, too, am very grateful to Jeremy Balfour for lodging the amendments on the important issue of supporting students with support needs. It was really good to meet him at the end of last week and have the discussion that we had. I put on the record again today, as I expressed in our discussion, that I am, of course, very sympathetic to and agree with the intent behind the amendments. Everyone should be enabled and supported to participate in post- school education, training or skills development.”
“There might be situations in which, for a variety of reasons, colleges had to move funding around or to look at where there might be reduced demand in any given year. Would agreeing to amendment 1 mean, for example, that money would sit unspent because an institution could not spend it in a different budget line? That might be detrimental to what we are all seeking to find agreement on this afternoon. We all agree that there is a need to provide enhanced support for those with additional support needs. I applaud Jeremy Balfour’s tenacity in pursuing the issue, but I have the general concern that legislating in the way that he proposes might not be the correct way to go about it.”
“Scottish Labour is broadly supportive of the intent behind the amendments, which were also discussed as probing amendments at stage 2. However, I have concerns about how the amendments are drafted and about the principle of putting in primary legislation something that would tie the hands of future Parliaments and Governments and, indeed, of the SFC. There is a broader concern about the requirement in amendment 1 to maintain funding levels. Obviously, I recognise that that is an important ambition, which, again, would command general support, but I would be keen to understand how Jeremy Balfour envisages primary legislation doing that without tying the hands of future Governments in their budgets.”
“Like Jeremy Balfour, I come late to the party in some ways. I thank him for his amendments and the intent behind them. It is important to recognise the vital element of providing support to people with additional needs. There is always a desire to do more in that regard, which was recognised widely by stakeholders, including those in the college sector, who pointed to the fact that many of our institutions are focused on ensuring that they can widen access and support young people, in particular, who have an additional support need to be engaged in courses that are really important to them. We recognise and know the funding challenges that exist, and it is important that Jeremy Balfour has brought that to the fore through his amendments.”
“In our meeting last year, the Opposition was keen for that to be delivered, and that is the commitment that I give again today.”
“However, Audit Scotland was clear that we need further granularity on how that funding, which is being protected at national level, gets into our classrooms. The data work that I announced in December is hugely important in that regard. Mr O’Kane spoke about the timescale in relation to the reporting of the short, sharp review. My expectation is that the review, which is being led by Janie McManus, will report before the end of this parliamentary session. I again invite Mr O’Kane to the meeting with Ms McManus. I will take on board his points in relation to debates and parliamentary feedback, but I hope that the fact that the report will be published before the end of this parliamentary session gives him some comfort.”
“Jenny Gilruth: I appreciate that Mr O’Kane was not the Labour Party’s spokesperson on additional support needs when the Audit Scotland report was published, but I am glad that he has welcomed the announcement today of the review and the national event, which was a key ask of the Opposition. Mr O’Kane is right to flag the Audit Scotland report, which I welcomed when it was published last year. I met Audit Scotland following its publication, and I noted that the interesting part of the report for me concerned the lack of data being held centrally in the Scottish Government about the national spend. I am able to tell Parliament that, in 2023-24, we spent more than £1 billion on additional support needs.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of the statement and for the correspondence relating to joining the group. A year ago, Audit Scotland bluntly put the challenge in context when it said that the Scottish Government had “failed to plan effectively for its inclusive approach to additional support for learning.” That is why, collectively, Parliament called for this further review, but I have to say that I think that many of us would have expected the review to come sooner. Given that there is so little time left in this parliamentary session, will the cabinet secretary say when, before the dissolution of Parliament, she expects the short, sharp review, as she describes it, to report? How will she ensure that we can have a debate in the parliamentary chamber ahead of dissolution on the issues contained therein?”
“However, I am clear that we must see significant movement at stages 2 and 3, in the time that remains in this session of Parliament, to allow the bill to progress past stage 3. We will work constructively where the Government offers its willingness to do that. However, so far, we on the Labour benches have been disappointed with the progress. 16:12”
“I recognise that we all made a commitment and that we did so based on the assurances that were given by the Government and by the then First Minister about how it would be driven forward. However, this bill exemplifies that there are significant gaps in the Government’s leadership and its engagement to drive the change that is required to meet the Promise by 2030. Of course one bill will not get us to where we need to be. However, as I have said already, it is a significant opportunity to drive the progress that we need to see. Stakeholders and the care- experienced community in Scotland deserve movement on it, and we want to give the bill the opportunity to be the vehicle that I have spoken about, so Scottish Labour will not oppose the bill at stage 1.”
“That does not fill me with confidence. Our suggested amendments have included measures on aftercare, corporate parenting, advocacy services, reform of children’s hearings and the issues in relation to UNCRC compliance that my colleague Martin Whitfield outlined. I find it disappointing that the Government has not offered fulsome engagement this week. The minister is shaking her head but, two days ago, the Education, Children and Young People Committee received a letter from her that said that she could not elaborate on many of those details and that we would have to wait until the stage 2 process. I do not think that that is good enough, given where we are in the process. Throughout this process, the Government has liked to talk about the Promise being owned by the Parliament and about it being ours to keep together.”
“What I find most striking is how keen stakeholders were to talk not just about the deficiencies of what is in the bill, but—in relation to the wider point that I am making—their concerns about what is not in the bill. We have already heard that stakeholders can see that, unless there is a step change in the bill throughout the stage 2 and 3 processes—in relation to dealing with a cluttered legislative and policy landscape, accountability for the Promise, or early intervention and workforce issues—the bill will not be the significant driver that is required to meet the Promise by 2030. We on the Labour benches have sought commitments from the Scottish Government on the changes that will need to be made at those stages. However, there has been something of a refusal to elaborate on the detail before this stage 1 debate.”
“Stakeholders have been calling for legislation, but they are increasingly frustrated by the approach of the Government. Indeed, in its risk profile for the bill, the most recent oversight report said that it could end up being “a ready-made excuse to slow the process down and to seek further consultations”. So far, the Government’s approach to engagement with stakeholders and other parties on what the bill needs to do and how it will be amended exactly meets that warning. I joined the Education, Children and Young People Committee only after it had concluded taking its evidence on the bill, but I have taken time to go through its stage 1 report.”
“As I said in opening my remarks, we will all be reflecting that we have just 30 legislative days left in this session, and we are considering a bill that is meant to drive us towards the progress that we need to see by 2030. I noted the minister’s optimism in her opening speech, but this is a serious issue. Colleagues are already picking up on that, and we will hear much about it in the debate. What can we reasonably expect in amending the bill within the 30 days that we have left, given that stage 2 will begin its progress next week? That will be a theme this afternoon: that many of the things that we would like to see in the bill might not be achievable in the timeframe that has been provided. Much of what is in the bill as introduced falls short of what was expected.”
“The Oversight Board’s report was unequivocal in its call for the Scottish Government “to redouble their efforts”. That is part of the reason why the bill represents a huge opportunity, although there is a risk to it, too, if it is not able to drive forward the progress that we would want to see. Interrogating the evidence before us that came through the committee process and that has been presented for this debate, I think that the bill might fall into that category of risk. That is very much of concern, and I am sure that that is lamentable for many of us in the chamber. It has taken more than three years from the commitment to a bill in the implementation plan to reach today’s stage 1 debate.”
“The minister needs no reminding that that report was lamentable for the Government in many ways, and concluded that “Scotland is not halfway towards keeping its promise.” The report noted that the Promise cannot be kept without the Scottish Government, and that it has taken “too long to produce a delivery plan and too long to respond to the serious concerns raised in our first two reports.” It further commented: “The relationship between Scottish Government and local government is creating unnecessary tension in delivering the promise.” We have already heard allusions to that with regard to where solutions could have been found—and they were offered in evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee in terms of the relationship between the spheres of government and the different sectors that will have an influence on achieving what we all want to see by 2030.”
“The former First Minister herself made that ask of everybody in the Parliament and is asking everyone here today to move that forward. This afternoon, we should begin by reflecting on the evidence on the progress that has been made in the delivery of that promise. Although it is the responsibility of Parliament, it is the current Government that sets the direction, the agenda and the legislative programme in the Parliament in order to drive forward the progress that we would all expect to see. We are all concerned—as we should be—about the evidence pointing to our not being as far on as we should be and not making the progress that we are all committed to. The third report of the Promise Oversight Board, which marked the halfway point in time on the journey to keeping the Promise by 2030, has made that abundantly clear.”
“I declare an interest in that my husband is a service manager in children and families social work and is also a registered social worker. With only a few months of this parliamentary session left, I am sure that we are all reflecting on what has been achieved and prioritised over the past five years—and, with only some 30 sitting days left, on what has perhaps not been prioritised as we would have expected. Indeed, we are reflecting on a period prior to that, going back into the previous session of the Parliament. In the final year of the previous session, the SNP Government asked the Parliament to make a promise to deliver on the findings of the independent care review by 2030. It then fell to the Parliament to progress that in its current session.”
“We will take no lessons from Paul O’Kane or anyone else on how to tackle child poverty, because we are doing it and the facts speak for themselves.”
“The answer can surely only be that it is out of energy and out of time and that it needs to get out of the way of a Government that will do the hard work of delivering. Shona Robison: It is really interesting how Paul O’Kane and Labour like to cite Welsh Labour when it suits them but, when it does not, they are very quiet on the matter. Apparently, it is all about what happens here in Scotland—until it suits them to say otherwise. On early learning and childcare, the Scottish Government was further ahead with its investments. The Scottish child payment—which is not, of course, available in Wales or England—is literally putting food on the tables of families. That leads to the fact that Paul O’Kane cannot escape, which is that Scotland is the only part of these islands where child poverty is falling.”
“There are adults working in Wales today who benefited from free breakfast clubs two decades ago, as the Welsh Labour scheme has been up and running since 2004. The UK Labour Government began rolling out free breakfast clubs in all state schools within a year of taking office, and it has boosted funding for after-school clubs in England to support the most isolated children. I, of course, welcome the Scottish Government following in the footsteps of those Administrations today, even if it has taken almost 20 years because of the Scottish Government’s own cuts to local authorities and schools. However, given that it had additional money from the UK Government, if the Scottish Government cared so much and was so convinced of the benefits of the policy, that begs the question why it has taken this Government so long.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports of a postcode lottery for classroom supplies and that some schools have only 93p per child per week for basic classroom supplies. (S6T- 02831)”
“We are also continuing to provide support for more than 38,000 apprentices who are already in training, as at 26 September 2025. We appreciate that there is growing demand for apprenticeships. We are working with industry and the college sector on how we can build on that success. We have a successful picture in Scotland. Let us work together to make it even better. Teacher Numbers 8.”
“Last year, 9,000 fewer apprenticeships in colleges and industry were asked for at a time when one in eight young people were out of work. This Government promised recovery from the pandemic. Does the minister not recognise that the hollowing out of colleges and not returning apprenticeship numbers to pre-pandemic levels is an abject failure of that promise? Ben Macpherson: This Government regularly emphasises the importance of our college sector and apprenticeships. Last year, more than 25,000 people started a modern apprenticeship in Scotland. This year, we are providing £185 million to support 25,500 new modern apprenticeships, 5,000 new foundation apprenticeships and more than 1,200 new graduate apprenticeships.”
“Although I know that Paul O’Kane’s question was not about the Scottish child abuse inquiry, it is again worth putting on record that, as was intimated on Monday last week, the Scottish child abuse inquiry can look at instances that may constitute grooming or group-based child sexual abuse, should it be within the terms of reference of the inquiry. I encourage those who think that they may have been affected to contact the inquiry directly, because it is there for good reason.”
“As I think Alexis Jay said when she provided an update to the committee, that will be taken forward through broader work by the strategic group in January. I have also set out my intention, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, to engage with the cross-party group on adult survivors. Further to that, we will take advice from the strategic group on ministerial engagement with survivors. I will come back to Parliament in February to say more about that, but it is important that that is undertaken in a trauma-informed manner.”
“Paul O’Kane: If a victim would not be covered by the pre-2014 point that Ms Gilruth made, where should they go if they have a story to share? Jenny Gilruth: I was taken by some of Alexis Jay’s commentary at this morning’s evidence session. She talked about lack of evidence and low levels of reporting. We need to be mindful that much of this type of crime is, by its nature, hidden. Often, the abuse involves a power differential. It is hidden in plain sight, so we need to be mindful that that underreporting—the low level of reporting— requires interrogation. That is why I set out in Parliament two weeks ago the approach that we are taking with the independent inspectorates. On victims, the work of the national strategic group is relevant in this space.”
“My sense from the committee evidence sessions this morning is that the Government does not have a grip on many of the issues. Given the reporting earlier in the week, it is clear that there has been confusion within review bodies, multiple ministers have taken parts of responsibility, and there were no terms of reference. However, I note what the cabinet secretary has now said about trying to get more clarity on that. This morning, I pushed the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs on the importance of victims and their concerns about the landscape being too cluttered, not being clear on who is responsible and, ultimately, not having confidence in the process. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Question.”
“The member has absolutely recognised that in terms of her leadership on the bill. I am conscious of time. We will of course support the bill. The principle is absolutely right. What we must do now, as with any legislation, is ensure that the guidance is robust, the data is well gathered and the finance is appropriate in order to support local authorities and individual schools to be able to deliver a meaningful outdoor residential experience for every child in Scotland, and to ensure that that can be done for many generations to come. 17:44”
“I recognise much of what has been said about the challenges in the financial memorandums leading up to this position. Some of the concerns that have been raised by school leaders and teachers are perhaps reflective of wider issues that exist in Scottish education. After 18 years of the current Government, there are a number of significant challenges, which we will debate on other days. However, those are the issues that are at the forefront of the minds of many headteachers and teachers, and I think that that is being reflected. I think that they would say that they absolutely recognise the importance of outdoor education and the importance of doing something about it, but that does not negate the other challenges that they have to deal with on a daily basis.”
“Those are focused on a number of challenges to do with staffing, including ensuring sufficient staffing and cover; ensuring that a significant contribution is made by those parents who can do so; and ensuring that people do not feel that they cannot make that contribution. The minister and I were councillors in Renfrewshire and East Renfrewshire. I do not know whether the minister served on the Renfrewshire Educational Trust when she was a councillor, but very often it was such bodies that were required to provide the additional funding that was often required for residential outdoor trips. What is clear is that we need to get the balance right between those who can make a contribution and those who need that additional support, which will come from the Government.”
“I say to Ross Greer that another interesting fact about Castle Toward is that it served as HMS Brontosaurus in the second world war, and that Winston Churchill was a frequent visitor—something that Ross Greer can perhaps share in his next engagement with Piers Morgan. However, what is important is that everybody recognises the value of the bill. That said, it is clear that significant challenges remain, not least those that have been outlined in relation to the financial considerations and the pressure that is on local authorities. In my exchange with the minister, I referenced some of the remaining concerns of school leaders.”
“The first thing to say in summing up is that we all recognise the significant impact and contribution that outdoor education and residential outdoor education make to children and young people in Scotland. We join in paying tribute to all those who have joined us today in the public gallery, who are specialists and experts in that field and who have given evidence at every stage of the bill as to the impact of their work. We have heard a lot today about the importance of protecting those organisations and specialisms, and about the challenges that have been posed, not least by the pandemic. We need to ensure that we have a strong sector of outdoor residential education in Scotland. That is very important. It was nice to hear some snippets of personal experience from people who have undertaken outdoor education.”
“I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. I recognise that I have come somewhat late to the process at stage 3, but I have been following the bill because of my interest in it. We have heard a lot in the debate about the genesis of the bill, and how it has developed since the initial concerns that were raised at stage 1 through the work by a number of colleagues across the chamber to refine the bill and get it into the place that it is in today, as we consider it at this final stage. I join colleagues in paying tribute to Liz Smith for her work and her dedication, for trying to improve the bill at each stage, and in recognising the significant challenges that remain and will have to be dealt with in the guidance that the Government will produce.”
“Notwithstanding those improvements, implementing the bill will still incur substantial costs for education authorities, and I fully expect the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to raise those in future budget discussions. Overall, I am pleased that we have been able to work together across the Parliament to find common ground and arrive at a bill that I hope that we can all support. I look forward to hearing other members’ contributions to the debate. 17:06”
“To go back to what I said about the staging of the implementation, there is a need to gather data and understand the next steps that need to be taken before commencement. I made it clear in my parliamentary statement to the chamber on 24 September that, if the Government was to be in a position to support the bill, we needed to see the affordability of its provisions addressed, specifically in regard to equity of provision, workforce implications and the duty on Scottish ministers to fund. I welcome that Liz Smith and others were receptive to such changes. Collectively, we have worked to improve the bill on those points, specifically by amending the duty to fund provision at stage 2 and by enabling financial contributions to be sought.”
“I recognise what the minister says about the strength of engagement, but does she recognise that everyone across the chamber will have had communication, even as late as this week, from school leaders about their concerns, particularly on staffing and the resource that will be available? Does she accept that those concerns will need to be clearly addressed in guidance? What can she say to those school leaders to give them further reassurance? The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can give you the time back for taking that intervention, minister. Natalie Don-Innes: I very much recognise those concerns, which I have laid out very clearly to members in the chamber and to committee several times. In fact, I engaged directly with the teacher trade unions to discuss their concerns at various stages of the bill, so I absolutely hear them.”
“However, Mr O’Kane raises a reasonable and important point about the holiday period that is coming up, and, of course, the engagement and presence of Police Scotland are important in that respect. I assure him, as I assured Mr Carlaw, that the issue is getting my personal attention at the present moment and that I will take forward the issues that he has put to me.”
“I ask the First Minister not only to give his support to those children and young people and their teachers—of course he will, I know—but to say what consideration has been given to the security of the buildings over the holiday period, when there may be fewer people around and fewer people in the community, to ensure that nothing happens to those buildings in that time. The First Minister: I am grateful to Mr O’Kane for his remarks. I very much associate myself with his comment that Calderwood Lodge primary school is a symbol of hope in a world that has an awful lot of darkness about it just now. In relation to the forthcoming holiday period, those are some of the issues that we are considering, to make sure that Calderwood Lodge primary school is properly supported at all times.”
“I very much associate myself with the exchange on Calderwood Lodge primary school, which is a symbol of hope and a beacon of the resilience of the Jewish community in Scotland. Over the past few days, none of us could have been unmoved by the displays of resilience in the Jewish community as people came together to light their menorahs and to stand together against hate. Tomorrow, at Calderwood Lodge primary school, the children will be taking part in their Hanukkah play. I do not think that there is any greater way that they could show their resilience, defiance and desire to go on than to stand and join in singing the songs of Hanukkah.”
“I associate myself and the whole of the Scottish Labour Party with the First Minister’s remarks and with all those who have offered their condolences to the families and friends of those who were murdered in the horrific antisemitic terror attack that occurred over the weekend in Australia. Such vile acts of terror and antisemitic hate shock us at any time, but it is all the more painful for those within our Jewish community as Hanukkah gets under way. I also associate myself with the remarks that Jackson Carlaw has just made. He and I know the community in Eastwood well, and we know that there is a real sense of fear and horror about what has occurred in Australia and about the potential that something may happen here, at home.”
“The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. Jenny Gilruth: As I mentioned, the national marketing campaign was launched last month, and it has been supporting some of the improvements in that regard. Paul O’Kane mentioned the attainment gap. I have mentioned some of the data that shows a narrowing of that gap. In 2024-25, the gap in relation to literacy has reduced to 19.4 per cent, which is its lowest-ever level. The gap in relation to numeracy in primary schools has also reduced to its lowest-ever level. Undoubtedly, there are challenges in the system that relate to the pandemic and to the points that I made in response to Mr Briggs. We need to intensify progress, which is why I have set out a range of measures in that regard. When appointed, the new chief inspector will have a key role in driving that improvement.”
“Paul O’Kane provided challenge, and I am happy to talk to some of the challenges. For example, I absolutely accept the challenge relating to attendance, which he mentioned. The Government has taken forward a range of measures in that regard. Two years ago, I instructed the chief inspector to take forward focused work with local authorities on the matter. Paul O’Kane was right to speak about the postcode approach that is taken by different local authority areas and the variance that we see in the system, but that is a feature of Scotland’s education system, with 32 local authorities running our schools. However, that is not a reason for further improvements not to be made, which is why—[Interruption.] I hear Paul O’Kane chuntering from a sedentary position. If he will listen— Paul O’Kane: I have never chuntered in my life.”
“The cabinet secretary uses selective figures to claim that the combined measure for the numeracy attainment gap in our primary schools is the lowest that it has ever been. However, the attainment gap for those in primary 4, when they are in that crucial transition—the halfway point of a child’s journey through primary education—has significantly worsened. Is not the overarching truth that John Swinney’s and the SNP’s stated mission on Covid recovery and education has completely failed? What is the cabinet secretary going to do about that, other than pat herself on the back? Jenny Gilruth: I welcome Paul O’Kane to his position. I note that he has welcomed the progress today and has talked about the constructive approach that he will take in his new role. I look forward to that engagement.”
“However, with less than three months of the current parliamentary session to go, we are told by the cabinet secretary that we are just turning a corner and are on a trajectory of progress. The reality is that our schools are still far behind where they were before the pandemic. We have heard about the failure to deliver the promise on teacher numbers. Despite a fractional increase since last year, attendance levels remain 2 per cent below the pre-Covid average, with unauthorised and persistent absence rates well above pre-Covid averages. Moreover, the Government has allowed a postcode lottery to develop. For example, East Ayrshire has one of the lowest attendance rates in the country, but, down the road in South Ayrshire, attendance rates are above the national average.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement. As I take on my new role, I am looking forward to my interactions with her, her ministerial team and, indeed, colleagues across the chamber. It is clear that, when progress has been made through the hard work and dedication of our teachers, young people and parents, that will receive welcome and constructive comments from Labour members. However, we will continue to point out, without fear or favour, the areas in which the Government continues to fail. The cabinet secretary spoke about promises being kept. If the defining promise of the parliamentary session that began in 2016 was to close the poverty-related attainment gap, the promise of the current parliamentary session was about Covid recovery in our schools.”
“I am sure that people across Scotland who are watching the debate will be asking what it will take for the Government to take its fingers out of its ears and listen to teachers who are walking away from the profession that they love. What will it take for the Government to listen to young people and parents who are worried about what goes on in our schools? If I was to have a restorative conversation with the cabinet secretary, I would say to her gently that it is clear that we need a new direction and that that is the only way to solve the current crisis in our schools. 16:48”
“In doing so, I learned very quickly that leadership can make all the difference in a school community, but there are now significant challenges in recruiting headteachers. People do not want to enter that promoted post because of the challenges therein. There is a clear struggle, because leadership comes from the top. It was interesting to hear the cabinet secretary refer to the Scotland football team and Steve Clarke. It is clear that he leads from the front, but I am not sure that the Government’s leadership can be compared to the bold vision and energy of Steve Clarke. I thought that that was a bold comment at the beginning of the debate.”