Liz Smith
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“For many years, I have come to this debate conflicted, well understanding several of the key points raised by those who support assisted dying, partly based on my own family experience, but also understanding the key points in the case against.”
“As a result, I worry about the implications in relation to coercive situations within families, who may put pressure on vulnerable relatives to end their lives, perhaps for financial reasons in increasingly difficult fiscal situations or for reasons that suit their circumstances rather than those of the patient.”
“I wish to say what I said at the start of my stage 1 speech: “Nobody could possibly doubt the far-reaching implications of the most appalling human tragedy at Grenfell tower in 2017, nor the importance of ensuring that nothing like that can ever happen again.” It is absolutely right that measures are put in place to improve building stand…”
“As the minister knows from stage 2, I have concerns about whether people involved in the conversion of historic buildings will face specific unintended consequences as a result of the imposition of the building safety levy, mainly because projects of that nature are not usually speculative and they tend to be a more expensive way of produ…”
“That must include the medical profession’s commitment to saving lives. I continue to worry about a situation whereby we hand ultimate power to doctors, with the possibility that voluntary action could lead to involuntary action.”
“It is on occasions such as these, when the matter that is under consideration is so challenged by complex ethical, moral, legal and practical questions, that I have come to know the Scottish Parliament at its best. We saw that last week and I believe that we are seeing it again this evening.”
The complete record
Every one of 413 lines we hold for Liz Smith, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 9.
“In doing so, we have helped people with on-going cost of living pressures while tackling the climate emergency by saving existing rail passengers money and encouraging new passengers to leave their cars at home and travel by train. Our council tax reduction scheme cut bills for more than 450,000 people, which helps households to retain more of their income when every penny counts. The Scottish child payment, which is one of the most important anti-poverty measures anywhere in the UK, now supports more than 320,000 families with children under 16 and it could lift 40,000 children out of relative poverty during this financial year.”
“That is the difference between a workable, well-thought-out plan and something that is, frankly, little more than a slogan. The Scottish Government is already delivering practical support that matters to households. We provide universal free school meals to more than 230,000 children in primary 1 to primary 5 and in special schools, as well as to eligible pupils beyond that. For families, that is a saving of around £450 per child each year. We provide free tuition. Students in England face tuition fees of up to £28,600, but that education is free in Scotland. We provide free prescriptions. Prescriptions are now £9.90 per item south of the border. There is free bus travel for more than 2 million people in Scotland. We have removed ScotRail peak fares for good.”
“The Conservative Party claims that its plans can be funded by reducing social security spending and making efficiency savings, but those claims are vague, and people rightly expect clarity. What cuts to social security are the Conservatives proposing? Would they be cuts to support for children, disabled people or pensioners? The Scottish Government has already identified in the medium-term financial strategy around £1 billion of realistic efficiency savings that can be made over five years while protecting front-line services, which is very important. Any efficiencies that the Conservatives are talking about would be in addition to those savings. The people of Scotland will not see that as being credible without cuts to public services in our hospitals, schools and social care.”
“Will the minister take an intervention? Ivan McKee: I will if I have time. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There is no extra time available. Ivan McKee: I am sorry, but I need to make some progress. Our approach is fair. We ask those with the broadest shoulders to contribute a little more so that families and public services are protected. In return, people benefit from support that is not available throughout the rest of the UK, including the Scottish child payment, free prescriptions and free access to higher education. Despite the naysayers, Scotland continues to attract positive inward migration from the rest of the UK and sees strong levels of inward investment from abroad.”
“Most importantly, the public overwhelmingly want pools to remain open, and we are all in the chamber today to represent their views. I continue whole-heartedly to support petition PE2018 and I call on the Scottish Government to act on Scottish Swimming’s calls for sustainable financial investment. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Neil Bibby—up to five minutes, please. 16:48”
“It would not even include on-site parking in the middle of Perth, which suggests either a total absence from reality on the part of the planners involved or that they simply do not care whether the facility is actually used. In order to keep the current level of swimming provision available, a sizeable financial effort and reallocation of resources will be required, but I believe that that will be an investment well made. I urge the Scottish Government to consider the potential preventative spend that facilities such as swimming pools provide, and to look at its own strategy on health, with which the current rate of pool closures is not compatible. The Scottish Government was persuaded to have a change of heart on outdoor education, and I hope that it will be persuaded in the same way on swimming.”
“Pools are social hubs and promote a healthy lifestyle for body and mind. They provide a centre for families and communities and, in many cases, for competitions at both elite and grass- roots levels. Many people have childhood memories of swimming, sharing fun experiences with friends, parents and grandparents, but that can happen only if pools are easily and readily accessible. In my region, there are currently plans to replace the immensely popular Perth pool, with its fun elements including flumes, rapids and an outdoor area, with a new pool in Thimblerow, but that proposal will downgrade the existing pool to one that is much smaller and far more basic.”
“That brings me to the point about the postcode lottery that exists with regard to who is able to access learn to swim programmes. Disadvantaged children in deprived communities are far less likely to be able to access swimming, given both the rising costs of lessons and the lack of provision at school. My primary driver for introducing legislation on residential outdoor education was to address the inherent unfairness, in that so many children were not being offered the opportunity because of their circumstances. Studies have shown that, just as there are benefits from outdoor education, that is also true of swimming. If all young people are to learn to swim—as I believe they should—there must be adequate provision of pools around the country within reasonable distances. There are also the health and wellbeing elements.”
“In a country with such an abundance of lochs, rivers, reservoirs and beaches, we must be ever more vigilant to the dangers of water and ensure that all children have the basic ability to swim. At this point, I issue a warning to some of the influencers on platforms such as Instagram and TikTok who are irresponsibly advertising some of those dangerous locations as beauty spots, at the same time as withholding key information about safety. That is unacceptable in this age of mass social media. It is the issue of school swimming that concerns me most, because it is still a key target for some local authority cuts. Eight of our local authorities do not offer school swimming at all, and a further 10 have only a partial school swimming offer.”
“Swimming remains incredibly popular: 13 per cent of adults swim regularly, making it the sport with highest participation levels after multigym and weight training—although I have to say to the cabinet secretary that pickleball is fast catching up, I think—and, most importantly, swimming is the most popular participation sport for those with disabilities, due to its suitability for those with reduced mobility. That is why nine out of 10 Scots believe that the closure of swimming pools is very bad for their local communities. There is also the safety aspect, which other members have spoken about. Learning to swim is a key life skill, but it is in decline. There were 33 accidental drownings in 2024, which is a stark reminder of why those skills are so important.”
“In October 2025, I was invited to attend the excellent national learn to swim 10-year celebration event with Scottish Swimming, Scottish Water and the Olympian Duncan Scott OBE. Both those Olympians were in no doubt whatever about the challenge that we face. In September 2023, I held a members’ business debate on the save our pools campaign and, in March 2024, I formally submitted my support for the petition to the convener of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee.”
“On current trends, that means the potential loss of more than 150 pools by 2040; we would have to replace them at the rate of four pools per year to maintain the current level of provision. It is very clear from that evidence that the future of community pools is in jeopardy, and that is why the public is desperate for parliamentarians to do something about it. It really matters to families and local communities. Throughout the lifetime of the petition, in my role as convener of the cross-party group on sport, I have consulted extensively with Scottish Swimming. I have co-hosted two fringe events at party conferences, alongside former Olympic swimmer Hannah Miley MBE, on the issue of access to pools.”
“Colleagues across the chamber are well aware that I have been a very strong advocate for the aims outlined in the petition for a very long time. I very much welcome the work that has been undertaken by the convener, Jackson Carlaw, and his colleagues on the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. When the Scottish Government comes to sum up at the end of this afternoon’s debate, I hope that it will make specific reference to the committee’s call for a task force to combine all the relevant stakeholders that the cabinet secretary mentioned earlier. Implementing such a recommendation could be immensely helpful. My colleagues in the Scottish Conservatives fully support this debate, and here is why. There are 295 public swimming pools in Scotland. Of those, 122 are more than 38 years old, which is the average lifespan of a pool.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, regarding any impact on agriculture, what discussions the rural affairs secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding how to protect rural areas against fly-tipping. (S6O-05291)”
“I hope that that change will provide the flexibility that is needed to ensure that there is a mixed funding model, which draws on financial support from a range of sources across the public, private and voluntary sectors, and including parental support. What is important is that those who cannot afford to pay are not required to do so, and that the parents of pupils with additional support needs are not charged extra because of those needs.”
“For me, that is a very powerful finding and one that shows that the bill represents a healthy long-term investment in our young people and society in general. However, the investment is not just purely financial. The bill’s provisions will help to address some of the stubborn and deep-seated problems that our schools face, from attainment to attendance, and from behaviour to wellbeing. It is a vital part of the jigsaw, particularly in the post- Covid era, when we have to work even harder to build resilience in our young people. The bill that I hope we will pass this evening no longer places a duty on the Scottish Government to fund the full provision of such education.”
“There is considerable inequality of provision, particularly for pupils with additional support needs and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. There is a wide variation in resource provision across our different local authorities. There is also inequality of provision between the state school sector and the independent school sector, in which residential outdoor education is embedded in the extra curriculum. Those inequalities are unfair. During consideration of the financial memorandum, I referred to the bill as “an investment” and an example of “preventative spend” in action. Evidence collected by the Outward Bound Trust across eight countries, including the United Kingdom, found that, for every £1 that is invested in outward bound programmes, there is a return of between £5 and £15 in societal value.”
“Those skills not only enrich our lives as individuals; they also benefit society and are the ones that employers want to see in new recruits to the workforce. This is, therefore, a very good day for those who passionately believe that residential outdoor education, and learning in the outdoors more generally, is a positive, formative experience. We know, too, that the current set-up has not been delivering well enough when it comes to residential opportunities. The scrutiny of my bill over the past three years has shone a light on that. Despite moves to improve matters when the Scottish Government’s vision for outdoor learning was produced in 2010, the pledge made in the 2021 Scottish National Party manifesto, and some schools and local authorities doing a first-class job, significant gaps remain.”
“Throughout all my 16 years as a secondary schoolteacher and my subsequent two decades as a parliamentarian, I have been firmly of the view that outdoor education is one of the most valuable and rewarding learning experiences that any young person can have. Residential outdoor education, which can enable young people to experience an environment that is very far removed from their usual everyday situations, is often life changing. That is why the bill is so important. Adventurous new experiences in the outdoors allow young people to develop lifelong connections to the natural environment. They build self-esteem, reliance, confidence and, most importantly, resilience. They also help them to learn leadership skills, the importance of valuing friendship and what it means to be part of a team.”
“It is a welcome measure that will improve the bill and I have no hesitation in encouraging all members to support it. I move amendment 1.”
“Amendment 6 requires the Scottish ministers to consult people who are employed in public schools or grant-aided schools who are not in trade unions before providing the guidance on residential outdoor education as required by the bill. At stage 2, an amendment in the name of Pam Duncan-Glancy that required trade unions that represent school employees to be consulted was agreed to. That is a welcome measure. It did, however, leave a potential gap whereby there was no provision in the bill for employees who are not in trade unions to be consulted. Amendment 6 plugs that gap, and I hope that the Parliament will support it. Amendment 7, in the name of the minister, requires pupils or their representatives to be consulted in advance of preparing the statutory guidance. The amendment follows many discussions that I have had with the minister.”
“Before I begin my remarks, I thank all those who have engaged so thoroughly on the bill. I also thank John Mason, Jackie Dunbar, Jeremy Balfour and the minister for their amendments in this group and for the general scrutiny that has taken place. I thank the minister for all the work that she and her officials have done. I also thank Pam Duncan-Glancy for all the work that she has undertaken on amendments in this group, particularly when it comes to additional support for learning. Group 1 is about the process by which statutory guidance under the bill is developed. Amendment 1 is a technical amendment that will correct a minor drafting error by referring to section 1 of the bill rather than the inserted section 6B of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980.”
“I completely and utterly reject that assertion. It is not doing anything that would be lacking in compassion and decency, not just because of the long-term effects on benefit claimants but because of the long-term effects on Scotland. 15:18”
“That is a matter of concern, and it is something that the Scottish Conservatives have been pursuing for some time. One issue is the exacerbation of the economic inactivity problem, which is a serious labour market issue for a number of sectors. If it becomes more financially comfortable to be on benefits and, at the same time, more expensive for employers to employ people because of rising costs, including Labour’s national insurance charges, the outcome is predictable. In other words, it would be much better if the welfare debate was more about the balance of incentives rather than mud slinging, which happens all too often. To sum up, those of us who argue that there should be constraints on this social benefit aspect are often told that we lack compassion and decency and that our stance is immoral.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: Will the member give way? Liz Smith: I think that Mr Balfour’s intervention might be on the same point. Jeremy Balfour: Liz Smith knows that I absolutely agree with her on the issue of universalism and benefits. However, on the issue that Mr Stewart raised and that I think that Liz Smith is trying to develop, I note that ADP actually helps people into employment. If we take ADP away from people, there might be a negative effect, with more people ending up in unemployment. Does she recognise that ADP might be the wrong benefit to go after? Liz Smith: I certainly acknowledge how important ADP is, and Mr Balfour is right that it takes people into work. However, we have to look at the exponential increase in it.”
“If I remember correctly, not that long ago, when the cabinet secretary was at the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, she rightly set out that the Government is facing the issue of not being able to roll out free school meals to the extent that it would like to. The cabinet secretary has to accept that there are issues for the Scottish Government. Jeremy Balfour: Will the member give way on that point? Liz Smith: I will come back to the member in a minute. Alexander Stewart set out the stark facts that we have to face. I will not rehearse them again, but I point out that most commentators believe that a large part of the problem is down to the lighter- touch approach to welfare applications, with fewer tough questions for applicants to answer and fewer rejections of applications.”
“Another reason why the debate is important is because far too many politicians, including Scottish ministers, shy away from the problems, especially just before an election, in the hope that they will go away. Of course, they will not go away, because they are now so serious. As Fraser Nelson wrote yesterday in his latest article, we will not solve that problem if we indulge only in a political “blame game”. We are all guilty of ignoring the extent of the problem. By the way, on Mr Balfour’s point, as members will have heard me say before, one of my frustrations in this Parliament is that we seem to continually avoid the necessary debate about which universal payments should be our priority and which should not be.”
“This debate is important not just because of the persistent warnings from the Scottish Fiscal Commission, Audit Scotland and all the other economic forecasters that the ballooning welfare bill is seriously threatening the fiscal sustainability of Scotland’s future, but because they believe that the system is not sufficiently transparent and the Scottish Government is not sufficiently accountable for the decisions that it makes. The Auditor General confirmed that at the Finance and Public Administration Committee yesterday. He is rightly complaining that the Scottish Government is not sufficiently transparent in explaining how its tax policies contribute to the Scottish budget policy profile or, just as important, which of them do that.”
“What genuinely disappoints me is the othering of poor people and of those who require social security support.”
“Does the cabinet secretary recognise that there is considerable public support for the two-child cap, because it is seen to be about the incentives that are given to families? The debate about social security should be about incentives and whether people feel that benefits are more productive or whether being in work carries a greater incentive. Shirley-Anne Somerville: I thank Liz Smith for her question, but it is important to recognise that, contrary to some of the incorrect narratives that are currently in play, the Resolution Foundation has set out very clearly that the abolition of the two-child limit helps working families, because three in five families that are set to benefit from its scrapping include at least one person in work.”
“To ask the Scottish Government, in light of its recent decision to allow a flat-rate approach to the visitor levy, what discussions the economy secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding whether to also introduce lower non- domestic rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses. (S6O-05259)”
“When it comes to 13 January, just for once, will the Scottish Government listen to what it is being told by the experts—the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the Fraser of Allander Institute and all the experts— because their messages are very stark? 16:40”
“The Scottish Government maintains that all those effects are offset by free prescriptions and free tuition, but it knows only too well that those are not free at all, as it is all taxpayers’ money that is being shelled out. The Government also knows only too well that the so-called policy of free tuition—which, incidentally, is very discriminatory because it affects only Scotland-domiciled students—is simply not working. The artificial cap on places for domiciled Scots is a very serious issue with regard to encouraging more graduates to stay in Scotland, and the Scottish Government knows that that is having a detrimental effect on colleges.”
“As I know that the Scottish Government has been told by many senior figures in business and industry, the growing gap between UK Government and Scottish Government tax rates is detrimental to attracting some of the new skills that we desperately need in this country, especially when it comes to new recruitment of middle and higher earners. That is on top of the fact that, as the UK Secretary of State for Business and Trade, Peter Kyle, has admitted, recent UK tax rises have led to an exodus of wealthy entrepreneurs. That is deeply damaging to investment. In Scotland, the difficulty of recruiting middle to higher earners is compounded by the higher rate of land and buildings transaction tax. The UK Conservatives say that it is time to scrap stamp duty. Will the Scottish Government do the same for LBTT?”
“We cannot have a repeat of what has happened in recent budgets, such as the 8.3 per cent real-terms cut in funding for the economy portfolio that formed part of the budget two years ago and the 20 per cent real-terms cut in college funding that has taken place over the past five years. Those are examples of policy decisions that undermine growth because they undermine jobs and the harnessing of new skills. In the case of colleges, they also undermine some of our local communities, which are desperately trying to address economic inactivity by getting more people back into the labour force. Let me turn to tax.”
“That has already brought very serious warnings from the Auditor General, the Scottish Fiscal Commission and the Fraser of Allander Institute, which have all been warning the Scottish Government for a long time about the folly of its ways—all, apparently, to no avail. Those expert bodies have all made the point that the increased devolved tax rates may have increased revenue in recent years, but that impact has been seriously weakened by the lower growth in earnings and employment in Scotland relative to the UK. In other words, we are paying far more tax but to no real benefit. Those facts should underpin the approach of the Scottish Government in its own budget, when it comes on 13 January.”
“They wonder why on earth it should become even more comfortable to be on benefits at a time when the promotion of jobs is becoming more expensive. Business and industry leaders are angry with the UK Government, which imposed a £25 billion bill for employer national insurance contributions— £2 billion-plus of that in Scotland—the effect of which, in rural communities, has been compounded by the pernicious tax on family farms. Business and industry leaders in Scotland are worried, too, because, in Scotland, there is the same policy pursuit of making welfare more generous in relation to the overall size of the budget.”
“If our business and industry leaders were participating in this debate, they would be absolutely seething about what they have heard in today’s budget, such have been the missed opportunities to improve productivity and to increase growth, which were their two big asks, and to lower the tax burden. Business and industry leaders are really angry about the confusion that has been created over recent weeks by the extraordinary briefings, rebriefings and leaks that we have had from 11 Downing Street, many of which have created considerable uncertainty and anxiety in the financial markets. They are angry about the intention of Rachel Reeves to put billions more into the welfare budget, which is already well out of control, and which comes at the expense of ordinary taxpayers having to stump up for the black hole in the fiscal budget.”
“That was a very sensible suggestion from Willie Rennie, and I hope that he recognises that the Government is very much listening to his views in this space. On ASN, I also highlight the national data summit that I opened last Wednesday at Murrayfield. Part of the challenge, particularly in relation to the additional support needs that we see across the country, are the various approaches to monitoring, tracking and measuring ASN. The variety of approaches disturbs the national picture, because it does not necessarily give us an accurate data set. The national summit that we had last week was extremely important, and I look forward to continuing to work with COSLA on arriving at a national understanding of how we measure ASN better to get that accurate picture.”
“Willie Rennie and others talked about the importance of teachers in our schools, and George Adam also spoke specifically to that point. Willie Rennie was right to speak about the increase in the number of additional support needs pupils, which we also heard about from Roz McCall and George Adam. I was pleased that Willie Rennie’s party, supported by the Green Party, voted for the Government’s budget last year, which provided an extra £29 million for the ASN workforce. Another stream of work that we have committed to undertaking is a wider cross-party review of ASN. As part of that, Willie Rennie came forward with a very positive suggestion on holding a national conference. I confirm that we will be holding a national conference on best practice in relation to additional support needs.”
“We accept that there are many things that schools are doing well, and we should be enhancing that. However, it is not just about money; it is about that culture and how we build the trust between pupils and teachers. Jenny Gilruth: I very much agree with Liz Smith’s points. In reflecting on our own teaching, we understand the importance of building trust with pupils and the class. That was fundamental to all that I did in my time in teaching, and I know that that was the case for Liz Smith, too. That trust was eroded during the pandemic, and we should be mindful of the challenge that, for many young people, returning to formal education has been difficult. We heard from a number of members this afternoon about the important role of our teachers and support staff.”
“I do not think that it is anymore. Our schools are now meeting the needs of a variety of different parts of society, whether that be health needs or income maximisation for parents and carers. We need to look at the totality of funding that goes to schools. I heard Mr Rennie’s points, a number of which, I have to say, I do not agree with, but I think that John Wilson’s appointment is an opportunity to look again at radical approaches to school funding. Our schools are now meeting needs that go beyond our educational requirements, and we need to reconfigure budgets to recognise that. Liz Smith: I understand what the cabinet secretary is saying, but it is not all about money; it is about a cultural change that is required in our schools. As my colleague Roz McCall said, it is about ensuring that we have the right culture.”
“Her final points about our curriculum and how we might better meet the needs of all learners, particularly outwith the formal curriculum, are really important. One of the aspects that Miles Briggs, Willie Rennie, Martin Whitfield, Ross Greer and I were discussing on Friday at the School Leaders Scotland conference at Loch Lomond was school funding post-pandemic. Pam Duncan-Glancy was not able to be there, but she has talked about making PEF permanent. I put on the record that I have made clear the commitment that, if my party is re-elected next year, we will continue that funding. I know that Scottish Labour has a similar position on that issue. There is a big-picture question about school funding that we have not really interrogated today. My question for Labour members and for the rest of Parliament is about whether it is enough.”
“That is where extracurricular activity comes in—members will not be surprised to hear me say that that includes residential outdoor education. Every young person has it within themselves to be good at something, and we should all ensure that they have the opportunity to develop their skills. I support Pam Duncan-Glancy’s motion and Miles Briggs’s amendment. 17:04 Jenny Gilruth: I welcome the MSPs and parties who have come forward with solutions during the debate. We have just been hearing from Liz Smith, a fellow former teacher, about the importance of the three Rs. She also talked about the role of local authorities, which we have heard about from others today, in perhaps dictating the content of in- service days, and about the importance of listening to the profession in that regard.”
“As I have said many times before in the chamber, we need to reform the middle years of secondary education so that our model is much more like the European one that values parity of esteem and develops meaningful apprenticeships at a much younger age. We need to address the problem of the disengaged. Longer-serving members in this Parliament will recall the Newlands Junior College initiative in Glasgow, which produced excellent results when it came to motivating our most disengaged pupils. How sad it was that that could not continue because of a political agenda. Lastly—this is probably a bit controversial, but I will say it—I am strongly of the view that we are far too inclined to make pupils believe that they cannot do things rather than that they can do things. We tend to make them think that they have a problem when they do not.”
“First, I want to see far more autonomy for our headteachers. One example of where I think that a change could be made in that regard concerns a local authority that tells all its schools that, on their five in-service days, they must all do the same topic, irrespective of whether that topic is relevant to that particular school. That cannot be right. We need a far more rigorous approach to the three Rs, because business and industry still moan about far too many young recruits not having a grasp of the very basic skills. No one should underestimate the frustration that young people feel if they cannot read, write and count properly, which leads to poor behaviour and a lack of motivation.”
“We need a system that rewards hard work, that stands for no nonsense from disruptive pupils or, as can happen on occasion, disruptive parents, that does not pander to pupils and parents, that allows headteachers to have autonomy, and that values extracurricular activity because of what it adds to the educational experience in terms of building resilience, self-esteem and confidence. As has been rehearsed this afternoon by several speakers, in too many cases, despite all the good things that are happening in Scottish education, we have seen a breakdown in classroom discipline, in relation to which many factors are at play. That is true in society as well as in schools, but that does not excuse it; indeed, it makes it even more important that we address the issues. What do I want to see?”
“I do not just mean the physical state of the building, although that is important, but the atmosphere in the classroom and whether it was based on calm self-discipline, with the expectations of high standards being well understood and adhered to, and with pupils and teachers recognising that certain structures and routines are beneficial to good-quality education. We need a school system that works and a curriculum that inspires and is complemented by an exam system that not only aspires to the highest possible standards but is diverse and responsive to the needs of different pupils.”
“In my teacher training course, the only thing that really mattered was how I could get on in front of a class. Forget all the theory, the coloured pencils, the size of the lines on the paper and what I wrote on the blackboard—that shows how long ago it was—what mattered most was how I got on with young people and, crucially, whether I could build trust between me and my pupils. That trust was partly dependent on the innate chemistry in the room but also on the environment in which the teaching and learning would take place.”
“I have already committed that the Government’s ambition is to increase the number of graduate apprenticeships. There is “Scotland’s Offshore Wind Skills Priorities and Action Plan”, the energy transition skills hub, the oil and gas transition training fund, and so much more that we want to deliver and build on, as well as—as I said earlier—a record number of 25,000 modern apprenticeships. [Ben Macpheson has corrected this contribution. See end of report.]”