Bill Kidd
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I think that it is possible to do that, and that having a child-centred and trauma- informed manner is important. I therefore urge members to accept my amendment or to accept Roz McCall’s amendment 75. Amendment 77 defines child-centred legal advice and representation.”
“Section 18(2) distinguishes local authorities because, unlike most other referring bodies, they will usually have on-going involvement with the child and the family once a referral has been made.”
“The minister also concedes that the amendments would not do any harm, so I would still ask the Government to accept them, because they would clarify the situation and leave things in no doubt at all. Finally—the Deputy Presiding Officer will be glad to hear—I will speak to amendment 201.”
“However, in line with the UNCRC, recent reforms made by the Parliament, such as the Children (Scotland) Act 2020, have moved away from arbitrary presumptions or distinctions about a child’s capacity that are based purely on age.”
“Notwithstanding that point, I have confidence that the dedicated infants and babies workstream will bring about changes, given who is involved in it—although I fear that those changes might not be dissimilar to what is being articulated in the amendments.”
“There is no consensus on the term, which means that there is some difficulty with legislation that contains it. The amendment relates specifically to section 18, which says that local authorities must provide the child in question with information on the children’s hearings process, the availability of child advocacy services and child-ce…”
The complete record
Every one of 349 lines we hold for Bill Kidd, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“It might well ring hollow without a response from the Government that meets the challenge raised in the committee’s report. 16:37”
“It is also not enough simply to say what should happen or that widening access matters and that the recommendations are helpful. People need to see policy decisions and actions that support our ambitions and meet the targets, and we expected to hear a bit more from the Government today about how that will happen and what that action would look like. The committee’s report was firm; it was stark; and it oozed with the frustration that we had heard from witnesses. However, that frustration will not have been assuaged today. We have heard nothing from the Government about the school- college partnerships, learner numbers, the review on student support or addressing the crisis in colleges. I said in my opening speech that, without action, rhetoric on widening access will ring hollow.”
“We have heard nothing from the Government, either, on support for students. I got to university only because of the support of the disabled students allowance and an army of brilliant advisers. That system has broken down, and advisers are struggling against cuts. As Maggie Chapman set out, students face significant barriers and action on dealing with them is long overdue. In the past hour, I have been reflecting on the minister’s response to that—and I have to say that I do not think that it is good enough to come to the chamber to talk about widening access and provide no update on a review that came about only after it was pointed out that the last review had resulted in years of inertia. I hope that the minister will give an update on it sooner rather than later.”
“The minister also failed to mention that, according to the data, fewer people from disadvantaged backgrounds had applications accepted in 2023 than in 2022, and retention rates have been beginning to fall since 2021. The effect of that is more pronounced for students from the most deprived backgrounds than for those from the least deprived quintile. Again, we heard little about that. On the unique learning number, the minister’s response that it is complicated is not good enough. This Government has had 10 years since the recommendation was made, and it is still saying that it is complicated. I agree with Willie Rennie that the Government should either get on with it, or say that it does not want to do it or does not agree with it, so that others can come forward with other suggestions or ways of making it happen.”
“There are 1,200 fewer places available in further and higher education institutions as a result of the Government taking them away after Covid, and that will have an impact on students from the poorest backgrounds. That is exactly the point that I think Stephen Kerr has highlighted, and it can have serious impact on educational and equal opportunities. The minister spoke of success and, as I have said, there has been some. However, although universities and colleges are working their socks off to support all who have the grades to enter them, they are doing so against the tide of cuts and a lack of priority. We have heard nothing about that from the minister.”
“Stephen Kerr: From one graduate of the University of Stirling to another, I ask Pam Duncan-Glancy whether she agrees that equality of opportunity will be elusive in our country for as long as there are caps on the number of young people who can go to university or college. Does she also agree that the way to create a more qualitative equality of opportunity would be to have no caps at all? Pam Duncan-Glancy: Capping potential is something that any member in this chamber must seek to remove. It is important that people can get to university through potential and drive alone. That can be achieved only if universities and colleges across the sector have the support of their Government and others to make it happen. In that respect, we have a long way to go.”
“The minister has set out that it is a Government priority to widen access and deliver parity of esteem; however, that is hard to square with the extent of the failure to recognise the system’s shortcomings, including those relating to the importance of the sector being match fit and the role of support for students in widening access, about which we have heard precious little from the Government. The minister spoke of successes, and there have been some, thanks to the sector moving mountains. Just for comparison, though, the proportion of applicants from the most deprived quintile accepted into Scottish universities in 2023 was 72 per cent compared to 78 per cent in other parts of the UK. We have challenges, and there are others from whom we can learn.”
“As Douglas Ross reminded us, the committee considered the issue nearly 10 years on from the commissioner’s first report, but much is still outstanding. The unique learner number is just one example of an issue on which the Government has failed to act. It has had 10 years and multiple opportunities to introduce the measure, including in the Education (Scotland) Bill earlier this year, but it rejected amendments from Scottish Labour and others to do so. I encourage the Government to move on it quickly; if it does not, another Government should. I am afraid that the Government’s inaction goes beyond that key factor, which could improve widening access, as Martin Whitfield and others have set out.”
“I particularly welcome the recognition of the doors that access to education can open to enable everyone in Scotland to live up to their potential. Many members from all parties have recognised that, including Jamie Hepburn, Brian Whittle, Bill Kidd and George Adam. That is why this inquiry has been so important. However, as members and the committee have set out, progress has been far too slow. I say gently to George Adam that that is the reality. The incredible work that many people do is not diminished, just because we recognise challenges. We are not being overly gloomy—it is just a reality check. We know that challenges can be overcome only if we accept the reality in the first place, but I am not sure that the Government has always got that fact.”
“I also look back on studying for my honours and masters degrees at the University of Stirling as one of the most formative experiences of my life, including when I first dipped my toe into politics—others can determine how successful that was—and to my time studying a postgraduate diploma at Glasgow Caledonian University as the first student on the university’s human rights course to combine work and study. I use those examples to show the rich tapestry of options that are delivered in Scotland, options that provide unimaginable opportunities for people such as me. My family—like Stephen Kerr’s, it sounds like—pushed me to reach for those opportunities in the interest of fulfilling potential. It is clear from the strength of feeling across the chamber that that experience is shared. So, too, is the ambition to widen access to it.”
“Together, we can ensure that higher education in Scotland is truly accessible to all—that it is fair, inclusive and a foundation for opportunity. The Presiding Officer: We now move to winding-up speeches. 16:30 Pam Duncan-Glancy: It is a pleasure to wind up for Scottish Labour. I thank Professor John McKendrick for the work that he has done on widening access to date and for allowing the committee access to his expertise in it. I have enjoyed hearing members talk about the brilliant educational institutions that we have in Scotland and their experiences in accessing them. I look back with fondness on my time at Telford College, and studying in the evenings for a level 1 counselling course. I have fond memories of doing that part time and with colleagues from the workplace.”
“Although the Government’s response in that respect is encouraging, I urge the minister to consider what more can be done to improve retention and housing support and how will we ensure that every care-experienced learner has the same opportunities as their peers. Widening access is not just about meeting targets—it is about transforming lives. It is about ensuring that talent and ambition are not stifled by circumstance. The committee’s report reminds us that progress has been made, but challenges remain. Financial barriers, mental health support, and systemic inequalities must be addressed if we are to achieve our 2030 goal. I look forward to continuing this vital work with colleagues across the chamber, the Scottish Government and our education sector partners.”
“The publication of the national ambition for care-experienced students is a positive step—it focuses on intake, retention and successful completions—yet challenges remain. Students told us of inconsistent careers advice, gaps in support and housing barriers, and Universities Scotland highlighted that, although many institutions offer year-round accommodation, shortages persist, particularly in rural areas. Those issues affect retention and success, not just access. In response, the committee has recommended that the Government provide regular updates on steps to address housing barriers and improve consistency of support.”
“I therefore urge the minister to update Parliament on progress on delivering the strategy and how its impact will be measured. In reply to the committee, the minister stated that, following careful consideration, the Government had decided not to reconvene at this time the group that was looking at support for disabled students, which was established in response to the 2023 review. Given the minister’s statement that the group will not be reconvened at this time, I would welcome his views on whether that decision will be periodically reviewed and what alternative mechanisms will ensure that lived experience continues to inform policy. Turning to care-experienced students, I note that the report acknowledges progress in that respect, with record numbers entering higher education.”
“The committee was disappointed that recommendations of the 2023 review of disabled student support had not been fully implemented. We welcome the Government’s commitment to consult on support for disabled students and part- time learners, but we need clarity on timescales and outcomes. The report includes several recommendations, and I welcome the Government’s constructive response to them. I particularly welcome the publication in June of Scotland’s first national transitions to adulthood strategy for young disabled people, which aims to ensure that we have a joined-up approach so that all young disabled people experience a supported and positive transition to adult life. That is a significant milestone, but implementation is the key.”
“Those aims reflected our shared ambition that, by 2030, 20 per cent of full-time first-degree entrants to higher education will come from the most deprived backgrounds. I want to focus on two specific areas that are highlighted in the report—disabled students and care-experienced students. On disabled students, the evidence was stark. In Lead Scotland’s survey, 16 out of 20 respondents said that disability made it harder to go to university, and 15 felt that universities did not welcome disabled applicants. Respondents called for better information, flexibility in course delivery, and staff training to ensure inclusivity. We also heard troubling accounts of low aspirations and young people being discouraged from pursuing university, because adults in their families deemed it an unrealistic aim. That is unacceptable.”
“Today, we have heard many voices with—shall I say?—sometimes differing views, but all with the same vision of fair access and equality for all. The committee set clear aims for the inquiry, following on from the recommendations in the report of the commission on widening access, which was chaired by Dame Ruth Silver. The inquiry examined how to meet the 2026 interim target of 18 per cent of full-time first-degree entrants coming from the 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds, as well as considering which access initiatives are proving to be successful, the impact of widening access on other SIMD groups and, critically, the challenges faced by disabled students, BME students and care-experienced students and what can be done to address those barriers.”
“I, too, thank all those who contributed to the Education, Children and Young People Committee’s report on widening access to higher education. The support from the clerks has been invaluable, as have the evidence and lived experience of the witnesses and the Government’s co-operation, in considering where we are going and how we are going to get there. I should not forget to mention, too, the dedication and tenacity of my fellow committee members. I believe that, together, we have ensured that this report is both comprehensive and constructive. The subject of widening access is, of course, hugely important. Higher education should be a gateway to opportunity, not a barrier. It is about fairness, social mobility and unlocking potential regardless of background, disability, ethnicity or care experience.”
“Yesterday, I was in Boroughmuir high school, meeting pupils and staff to learn more about the mentors in violence prevention project, a peer-to-peer piece of work that the Scottish Government also supports. The project helps young people in secondary 6, for example, to work with their secondary 1 counterparts and to tackle some of those issues on a peer-led basis. Those are examples of what the Scottish Government is supporting at the current time, but we remain open to working with Education Scotland on these challenging topics. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I will allow a very brief question from”
“The role of disinformation is increasingly alarming in today’s age. We have seen hateful online rhetoric spread rapidly to incite division. What resources are available to schools to increase children and young people’s awareness and resilience to online disinformation? Jenny Gilruth: It is fair to say that disinformation is being used across Scotland and the United Kingdom to stoke division—we are all aware of that. As I mentioned, there is no place for that discrimination or intolerance in Scotland’s schools. In response to Ms Chapman’s question, I mentioned the work that is happening through the Time for Inclusive Education campaign and the digital discourse initiative.”
“I apologise. I got my times all mixed up because of different people saying, “Be here”, “Be there” and so on. To ask the Scottish Government what support it will provide to pensioners to help with heating bills as winter sets in. (S6O-05218)”
“By supporting the general principles of the bill, I hope that we can go some way to showing them that their voices matter, that the Parliament listens and that Scotland continues to take seriously its duty to uphold the rights of every child. I therefore urge members to support the bill at stage 1.”
“I therefore understand the conflicting opinions that are involved, and I urge all parties to raise those issues at stage 2. The bill takes careful steps to ensure that a child’s voice is part of decisions about their learning and identity. It strengthens clarity for public authorities in implementing the UNCRC and reinforces Scotland’s continued journey towards making rights real not only in principle but in practice. Children do not ask for much—at least, most of the time. They ask to be heard; to be respected; and for adults, parents, teachers and law makers to make decisions with them, not simply for them.”
“In reply, she stated: “As all will be aware, the Parliamentary process provides stakeholders and all of those with an interest in the bill to put forward their case for amendments. Throughout this, Ministers will continue to discuss these issues with parliament and other interested parties, and I will consider all the points made in both the written and the oral evidence from those who were invited to give evidence to the Committee.” I understand that the consultation raised concerns about how an independent right for pupils would be balanced with parental rights. I also understand that, in response to the Humanist Society Scotland’s report “Preaching is not Teaching”, the cabinet secretary met the society and has asked it to share further information on its examples of religious observance not being delivered inclusively.”
“The Government has undertaken wide-ranging consultation on the bill, engaging with ADES, the Humanist Society Scotland, the Scottish Catholic Education Service, STARME and Together, alongside faith and belief organisations and members of the Scottish Youth Parliament. That level of engagement shows both the sensitivity of the subject and the commitment to listening to all voices, including those that too often go unheard. Of course, no legislation is perfect at stage 1, and I understand the strong feeling of many that the legislation does not go far enough. Indeed, I have received a number of inquiries from constituents looking for the Scottish Government to amend the bill to give pupils an independent right to opt out of religious observance. I raised those in writing with the cabinet secretary.”
“We are debating the child’s right to be heard about their participation in them, and that right matters deeply. Part 2 of the bill might seem more technical, but it is no less important. It seeks to ensure that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 can operate in a way that protects both legal certainty and the continuation of essential public services. It seeks to introduce an exemption for public authorities when they face a direct conflict between the compatibility duty and an act of this Parliament. That is a proportionate step that will allow the UNCRC framework to function clearly and fairly. Indeed, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has always emphasised that incorporation must be workable, accessible and coherent.”
“Article 12 of the UNCRC gives every child the right to express their views freely on all matters that affect them and to be heard—not to be listened to as a courtesy or nodded to in passing, but for their views to be given due weight. Part 1 of the bill seeks to introduce a legal requirement for schools to inform children when a parent seeks to withdraw them from religious observance or religious and moral education, and to ensure that their views are considered in that process. Importantly, however, it maintains parental rights at the same time as strengthening children’s rights. It attempts to strike a balance between the two, and I welcome that. Religious observance and religious and moral education play different roles in our education system, but let us remember that we are not debating the value of those subjects today.”
“At its heart, the bill is about strengthening the rights and voices of Scotland’s children—something that this Parliament has repeatedly committed to doing over the years. It seeks to make two targeted but meaningful changes, and although it is somewhat technical in nature, I hope that it will bring meaningful changes to the everyday experience of children in our schools and the way that our public authorities understand and uphold the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The bill aims to ensure that, in the context of the long-standing parental right to withdraw a child from religious observance, children’s and young people’s views are taken into account.”
“With regard to the United Kingdom Government’s asylum proposals, the assessment of the Scottish Refugee Council, which is exhibiting in Parliament this week, is that the proposals risk pushing the national conversation into dangerous territory by mirroring the language and tone of the far right. Does the First Minister agree with that assessment, which I believe will be shared by constituents across Scotland?”
“Despite the wording of the motion, I remain, as always, ready to work with colleagues from all parties for the benefit of children and young people across Scotland. 16:43”
“To say that pupils and staff are being failed is disingenuous and disrespectful to all those who work hard to improve our education system. I find it disrespectful when colleagues refer to the Scottish Government as the Scottish National Party Administration. I would hope for better from colleagues whom I have always respected. I frequently disagree with the actions of the UK Government, but I still refer to it as the UK Government out of basic respect for the institution. I would have hoped that we might hold ourselves to the same standard in Scotland. Pupils and staff deserve a debate that lifts them up and not a motion that uses them as a weapon. They deserve co-operation and not division.”
“I welcome the recent agreement that ensures that Scotland’s teachers remain the highest paid in the UK, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, with a 7.5 per cent uplift over two years. I also welcome the commitment to undertake further work to reduce teacher workload, alongside the commitment to reduce class contact time. Crucially, we must celebrate the successes of Scotland’s young people. Their achievements in classrooms and communities, including in the arts, sciences and sports, deserve recognition in the chamber and beyond. I turn to the motion. There are challenges and we have work to do. To tackle those issues, we need to work together. Rather than attack, we should support the work that is being done.”
“In that vein, it is important that we ground the debate in the real challenges that our schools face—not in slogans or point scoring, but in facts. The Scottish Government’s amendment highlights the challenges that we have faced post-Covid. The reality is that schools have struggled with reduced attendance, greater variation in pupil engagement and a significant rise in the number of pupils with additional support needs. That is why I welcome the additional funding to improve outcomes for children with ASN and to strengthen and expand the ASN workforce. Let us be clear that those steps will directly impact the classroom experience by ensuring that children who need the most support receive it and that the staff who deliver that support are properly equipped.”
“I thank Sarah Boyack, who is sitting down the front, for lodging the motion. Never mind that Bob Doris was not even in the room! I say to Pam Duncan- Glancy that I am sorry about that joke. As a member of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, I have found it to be a pleasure to work together with colleagues from across the chamber on a wide variety of issues concerning Scotland’s education landscape. I have genuinely enjoyed my time serving on the committee. The dedication that is shown by colleagues from every party on the committee reminds me every week that, whatever our political colours, we are here for the same purpose—to improve education in Scotland and to give every young person the chance to develop and thrive.”
“Can any more be said about the Scottish Government’s work with stakeholders to ensure that all those affected receive clear information about their options for reparation and have the appropriate support that they require? Richard Lochhead: Various parties involved in the debacle are exploring a number of options. We are keen for all policyholders to be kept up to date with those options once they become a bit clearer. As I said, matters related to the FCA are reserved to the UK Government, but we will continue to have a dialogue with the authority and to press home that very important point. We will also continue to engage with stakeholders in Scotland so that we can stay abreast of their concerns as the situation develops over the coming weeks.”
“Let Euro 2028 be not just a great tournament—and it will be—but a great opportunity to secure a win for us all. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We now move to closing speeches. 15:49”
“In evidence to the committee, the minister highlighted that the impact of the benefits gained from the tournament will be spread across Scotland, thereby furthering a number of national outcomes. I would welcome it if the minister could expand on that today. I also support calls for a future chamber debate dedicated specifically to the legacy planning for Euro 2028, to ensure transparency, co-ordination and a clear strategy that aligns with our national outcomes on health, community wellbeing and participation. When the stands are empty, the visitors have gone home and the cameras have turned elsewhere, what will remain is the Scotland that we built through this opportunity. If we do it right, that Scotland will be healthier, more active and more united.”
“We must live up to those words, ensuring that public money that is invested in the event delivers returns in terms of health, opportunity and social cohesion. The legacy must be felt in every corner of Scotland—not just at Hampden park or in the hospitality sector, but in local clubs, youth programmes and communities that see football as a force for good. Presiding Officer, this is about accountability. Public funding is being committed, and it is our duty to make sure that it is not spent solely on making our stadiums shine for the cameras. Instead, it must help to create a framework for lasting community benefit through sport, inclusion and pride in the place in which we live.”
“From the 2014 Commonwealth games to the 2023 UCI cycling world championships, we have seen how hosting global events can raise our international profile and deliver infrastructure improvements. However, the lesson from those experiences is clear: legacy does not just happen—it has to be built. That means using the inspiration of Euro 2028 to strengthen grassroots football across Scotland. It means improving access to facilities so that every young person, regardless of their background, gender or ability, can take part in sport. It means working with schools and communities to promote health, fitness and social inclusion through football. The tournament slogan, “Football for all, football for good, football for the future”, should guide our approach.”
“As Professor David McGillivray of the University of the West of Scotland reminds us, all major sporting events produce legacies—some positive, some not. The difference lies in how deliberately we plan for them. A lasting legacy will not emerge by chance. It requires foresight, investment and co-ordination across the Government, local authorities and sporting bodies from the outset. The minister has rightly noted that the projected economic benefit could be as high as £2.6 billion across the whole of the UK, but economic figures alone do not tell the full story. We must ensure that the benefits of that investment translate into real outcomes for our communities in relation to participation, wellbeing, inclusion and pride. Glasgow has a strong record in that regard.”
“As we have heard, the UEFA European Championship (Scotland) Bill will provide the legal framework that is necessary for hosting part of Euro 2028 here in Scotland. The bill will ensure that commercial rights, ticketing, trading and advertising are regulated in line with UEFA’s requirements, which does not suit everybody entirely, but which is something important to talk about. Although these are important practical measures—ensuring fairness, protecting fans from exploitation and maintaining the integrity of the event—I believe that today’s debate, and indeed any discussion around the Euros, needs to go further than simply regulation. It must also focus on the question of legacy. What lasting impact will Euro 2028 have for the people of Scotland once the final whistle blows?”
“Last week, it was revealed that a fragment of waste found in April near the decommissioned experimental nuclear power facility at Dounreay was the most radioactive waste detected in the past three years. Despite those clear environmental warnings, United Kingdom Labour ministers are threatening to impose expensive, unsafe and unnecessary new nuclear sites on Scotland. Does the First Minister agree that Labour should see sense and abandon its nuclear obsession?”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I had a problem with my phone. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Kidd. Your vote will be recorded.”
“Is there anything else that the minister can say about the role of local authorities in allocating resources for youth work? Ben Macpherson: I recognise that local authorities have significant resource and a responsibility to invest in youth work. We are investing through other avenues where we can, including through Youth Scotland and YouthLink Scotland. We have invested £2 million since 2023 through community-based national youth work organisations. I will continue to consider how central Government, working with local government, while respecting the Verity house agreement, can support the important contribution that youth work makes to our communities. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause before we move to the next item of business to allow front bench teams to change position.”
“We will make sure that Scottish students continue to have the lowest average student loan debt in the UK, and we are committed to free tuition, as the Parliament well knows. First Minister’s Question Time 12:00 Disposable Income 1.”
“The minister will be aware that, this week, the United Kingdom Government has moved to reintroduce grant support for students on low incomes—and about time, too. Can he confirm that the policy of utilising international student income for that purpose will not affect Scotland’s universities? How do the new measures in England compare with what the Scottish National Party already provides by way of support to students? Ben Macpherson: The matters that the member raises in relation to the UK Government’s announcement are matters of concern that the Scottish Government will consider. We will continue to make sure that, through free tuition and the enhanced support that is provided in Scotland, learners in Scotland receive the most support in the UK and that the total package of support that is provided here is the most generous in the UK.”
“It will put apprenticeships and skills on the statutory map; it will give the Scottish Funding Council a stronger framework; and it will ensure fairness for learners and do so with an eye to sustainability and accountability. There is polishing to do, and I will work with colleagues from across the chamber to make improvements to the bill at stage 2. However, its rationale is sound, its intent is clear and the opportunity that it presents is one that we should not squander. Let us seize this chance to provide clarity where there has been confusion, stability where there has been fragility and fairness where there has been doubt. That is what the bill sets out to achieve, which is why I support its principles at stage 1. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the final speaker in the open debate. John Mason, you have up to six minutes. 16:23”
“Thirdly, we should seek greater clarity on student support rules, ensuring that eligibility and appeals are straightforward and transparent. Fourthly, governance reform must include the voices of learners themselves, and in particular those from underrepresented or disadvantaged backgrounds. Finally, implementation matters: we need a phased and careful transition, with regular review, so that the reforms strengthen institutions rather than destabilise them. Our education system is one of Scotland’s great assets. It provides a bridge to opportunity for young people, a second chance for adults and a lifeline for communities that seek renewal. To keep that bridge strong, we must ensure that our funding and governance systems are not just fit for purpose today but resilient for tomorrow. In my judgment, the bill can provide that foundation.”
“Fairness is also at stake: Scots studying at private institutions should not face uncertainty about their support, and the bill will give them the clarity that they deserve. That being said, no bill arrives in a perfect state. The committee’s task is to take away what we have heard in the debate, alongside the evidence of witnesses and institutions, and to further refine the bill’s provisions. There are a few key areas for us to focus on. First, we must ensure that reporting requirements are proportionate. Institutions must of course be transparent, but smaller or rural colleges must not be buried under bureaucracy. Secondly, we must strike the right balance between flexibility and prescription. Strategic alignment is vital, but local providers must retain the freedom to innovate and respond to community needs.”
“In short, the bill will simplify, strengthen and steady the framework for how Scotland supports learning beyond school. The current financial pressures on colleges and training providers are very real. By embedding financial monitoring and sustainability checks in statute, we will help to protect institutions from sudden crises, thereby reassuring learners and staff that colleges and providers will remain stable and resilient. At the same time, we must remember that Scotland’s future workforce needs to be adaptable. Our economy is changing rapidly, through digitalisation, the green transition and the ever-growing demand for lifelong learning. The bill must help to align post-school education with those wider priorities.”