John Mason
Independent · Scotland
“I noted press coverage just yesterday of the vacancy level for both primary and secondary teachers in the Highland Council area, yet I get complaints from young teachers that they cannot get a job in Glasgow.”
“I thank Jamie Halcro Johnston for securing the debate and other members for their kind words. Many people in Scotland’s urban areas and central belt still care deeply for our remote, rural and island communities.”
“[Laughter.] I was proved correct during Covid, when it was treated as part of the mainland. I can understand the desire to have causeways, bridges or tunnels linking islands to each other or to the mainland. That makes access to a range of services much easier, from shopping to medical services, weddings and funerals.”
“Land mass should be a factor, too. This is my last speech in Parliament, so I thank all those who make this Parliament work, including fellow MSPs—and especially those who are leaving. We are much smaller than Westminster, and that is a big advantage in my opinion.”
“In my opinion, that should be a higher priority than dualling the A9. I do not often agree with Scottish Land & Estates, but I agree with some of the key points in its briefing for the debate. Tackling depopulation in rural areas has to be a top priority; and as it says, “if rural Scotland does not thrive, Scotland does not thrive”.”
“That has clearly got me into trouble at times, but it has certainly been a huge privilege to serve here. I conclude by thanking you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and your two colleagues.”
The complete record
Every one of 652 lines we hold for John Mason, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 14.
“As I said to Maggie Chapman at stage 2, I understand the desire to separate the two elements in a non- denominational setting, because I understand the academic value of religious, moral and philosophical studies compared with what religious observance looks like in a non-denominational school. However, I do not think that we can compare the two settings, because they work in different ways. For those reasons, we will not support Maggie Chapman’s amendments. We have concerns about amendment 21, in the name of Elena Whitham, because, although guidance on RO would be welcome, some of the text of the amendment suggests that it might lead to the deletion of ethos and nature within denominational settings, which I have referred to already.”
“The two things are interlinked. The link is probably more acute in the primary sector. In Catholic schools, children are taught how to prepare for their sacraments in an RE lesson, but that will involve an element of practice, as Mr Mason will understand. I do not think that the two things should be decoupled in such settings, and it would be very difficult for them to be decoupled in practice, if the Government chose to go down that road. As I have said, narrowing the definition of RE in a faith school to, extensively, interpretations in the academic curriculum could lead to more problems than are being anticipated.”
“I take Paul O’Kane’s point that the two are interlinked just now. Is he arguing that the two have to be interlinked, or could they be separated? Paul O’Kane: Mr Mason makes a fair point. I am arguing that the two should be interlinked. My understanding from my own education is that the two things are interlinked for a very strong purpose, which is about the unique ethos of a Catholic school being about both practice of someone’s faith and learning about faith in an academic sense. Going down the road of trying to separate religious observance from religious education in a denominational setting would be extremely problematic. It would also be hard to do, particularly in a Catholic school, although, from what I understand of Calderwood Lodge, having been there, I think that that would also be true of Jewish schools.”
“It makes decisions that suit it, and that does not include treating Scotland fairly. Historically, we have not been able to compete with London and the south-east of England, and, as we were reminded by Professor David Heald at the Finance and Public Administration Committee’s meeting this week, if bonuses rise in the City of London and English Premier League footballers secure higher relative salaries, there will be increases in the income tax block grant adjustment for Scotland. Fundamentally, something has to change in our financial relationship with the UK. 16:34”
“Such a revaluation would mean that roughly half the population would be winners and half would be losers. However, the lack of action on council tax is not victimless. The current winners are those whose homes have gone up proportionately more in value since 1991. The victims are poorer folk in constituencies such as mine whose homes have not gone up much in value. The Greens have argued consistently for a major change in local taxation—they are the only party who has argued for it—so, if they are going to be kingmakers after the next election, I hope that they will make that a central demand of any agreements that they make. Finally, we are trapped by a fiscal framework that is flawed and biased against Scotland. The major downside of devolution is that, at the end of the day, England—or the UK—makes all the big decisions.”
“In Scotland, we have a relatively fixed budget to share out and, not surprisingly, almost everyone wants more. We should not be giving our limited funds to those who shout the loudest. That is my problem with the hospitality sector. It is very organised, it gets a lot of media coverage and it shouts very loudly. However, I use restaurants and pubs reasonably regularly, and it is clear that many of them are doing well. Groups such as DRG are expanding. If we cannot afford to give care workers a decent wage, there is no way that we should be further subsidising the hospitality sector. I will support the Government’s budget today, but I am disappointed at the slow pace of reform in relation to replacing council tax. I know that the SNP and almost all other parties are reluctant to upset voters or even to have a revaluation of properties.”
“Some would say that we are short of money for social work, care and other things while some hospitality businesses are very profitable. They are expanding, busy and doing very well, so why should they get more support? Shona Robison: I take John Mason’s point, but we also have to ensure that our hospitality sector, which is the life-blood of many towns and villages across Scotland, can continue. Given all the headwinds that it has had, such as the increase in employer national insurance contributions and the hike in VAT, which has put up the cost of all produce, we believe that the package is appropriate. We estimate that the measures will provide about £40 million in additional relief in the next three years, which demonstrates our commitment to supporting business.”
“The Deputy Presiding Officer: We may not hear about the verges unless Ms Villalba changes her mind and presses her button. As I have advised members who wish to participate in the debate, there is, as Mr Mason rightly anticipated, a lot of interest in participating. In order to allow every member a chance to contribute, speaking time allocations have been reduced to three minutes, so I would be grateful if members could stick to that. 17:42”
“Apparently 65 per cent of land in Scotland is completely devoid of badger presence, so I think that they need a champion in Parliament, and hopefully that can be changed. However, new MSPs will have to be quick if they want to support a popular species. We all know that Christine Grahame regularly grabs the seat behind the First Minister each Thursday so as to be on television, and she has also grabbed a very popular species in the golden eagle. I thank Scottish Environment LINK and its member organisations for setting all this up; I thank colleagues for all their work and interest in the subject and for their support today; and I look forward to hearing contributions from members— even Christine Grahame’s contribution on the golden eagle.”
“I realise that the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands cannot take on a species because she might be seen to be biased in some way, but there are other members. I was intrigued to see in the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals manifesto that 87 per cent of people in Scotland now identify as animal lovers. That is good, but my question is this: why are the other 13 per cent not animal lovers? The good news for that 13 per cent, which could be around 16 MSPs, is that they can still be a nature champion and take on something which— like Graham Simpson’s ash or Carol Mochan’s kelp forests—is not an animal. There are some species that would probably benefit from having a nature champion but do not have one. An example would be badgers, about which I had an email the other day.”
“One of the purposes of today’s debate is to re- emphasise the importance of the nature champions scheme, especially as we head towards the end of the current session of Parliament, given that quite a number of MSPs are either retiring or will not come back for other reasons. I hope that those champions who return will continue to support a species or habitat—either their existing one, or perhaps a new one—and that both they and the Scottish Environment LINK member organisations will have a real push to get the 60 new MSPs signed up. In one sense, the question is, why would an MSP not take on the role? If more than 100 of us have done so, why not the other 25 or so?”
“In retrospect, perhaps I should have chosen something that is easier to find, as Colin Beattie has done with rivers or Emma Harper has done with ponds and small lochs—they do not move around quite as much as kestrels do. There are some tricky situations where a species with a champion eats the species of another champion, such as Claire Baker’s puffins, which eat Willie Rennie’s sand eels. You might say that some species are a bit more exciting than others. Mark Ruskell has the white-tailed eagle—that is absolutely tremendous. However, Mercedes Villalba has road verges—I would need some convincing to get excited about them.”
“Kestrel numbers in Scotland are down by some 67 per cent since 1995, the reasons for which are not entirely clear but probably include changes to farming practices. Numbers fluctuate from year to year, depending on the availability of the kestrel’s main food source, which is voles. However, the reasons seem to be partly geographical, too, in that alternative food sources, such as baby starlings, might be available in some areas but not in others. The revival in the number of pine martens means more predators of kestrel eggs and chicks. However, I do not think that pine martens have a champion, so I am not blaming any of the members who are here today.”
“Although it is not in the most endangered category, it has been in decline over a number of years. We used to see kestrels regularly hovering over motorway verges around Glasgow, but we see them less often now. As Fiona Hyslop has blanket bogs and Jamie Halcro Johnston has Caledonian pinewoods, I guess that they do not move around very much and that you can visit them whenever you like. However, others among us—such as me with the kestrel, perhaps Martin Whitfield with the adder, or Rhoda Grant with the wildcat— can be quite elusive and you have to get to specific places at specific times to see them up close. In two different years I have gone out to watch a team ring young kestrels, which can only be done at a certain time when the birds are not too small and not too large.”
“There is a theory that urban politicians, such as myself, should stay out of matters that affect rural areas. However, a lot of us love all parts of Scotland, including cities, towns, rural areas and the maritime environment—that is the way it should be. Looking at the list of MSPs and their adopted species, I saw that Kaukab Stewart has the corncrake, which is not common in central Glasgow, and Anas Sarwar has upland birch woods, which I have not seen in the city either. It is a good thing that we all take an interest in all parts of the country. Contrary to popular belief, I am not the species champion for the Soay sheep on St Kilda, although maybe I should have taken them on as an additional species—despite the fact that there are actually too many of them rather than too few. My species is the kestrel.”
“I thank all those who have supported today’s motion, those who have enabled this afternoon’s debate and those who will take part in it. I welcome to the public gallery representatives of some of the organisations that support nature champions, including—and especially—Scottish Environment LINK, which co-ordinates everything, and the Scottish Raptor Study Group, which covers the eight MSPs who champion raptors. The nature champions initiative has become incredibly popular among MSPs, and an amazing range of flora, fauna and habitats now have a member speaking for them. Some 105 MSPs are nature champions. I thank Scottish Environment LINK—Andrew Marks in particular—and its 25 supporting organisations, which include RSPB Scotland, the John Muir Trust, the Scottish Wildlife Trust and WWF Scotland.”
“The member makes the point that, without data, we do not know what the situation is for an unregulated track. Would the assumption not be that it will be worse than at a track that is regulated? Finlay Carson: Throughout our evidence sessions on the bill and the petition, we heard no evidence of dog injuries or reports to the Scottish SPCA to suggest that there was any cruelty. We were just dealing with the data that was put in front of us. We were not making assumptions—it is simply that such evidence was not available.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what information it holds on the diversity and socioeconomic background of audiences attending performances by the national performing companies. (S6O- 05424)”
“I am looking for the Government’s acknowledgement that those sheep are not wild animals; its acceptance that sheep are dying of starvation in unacceptable numbers; and its agreement that the status quo is not an option. If I get those assurances, I will probably not move amendment 24.”
“I happen to be familiar with that, as my brother is one of the local vets. Members might have seen pictures of those goats in the town. Again, the goats are left largely to themselves. However, there is some human intervention: for example, one got stuck in a cave, was tranquilised and had its horns trimmed. I have been contacted by a variety of people since my question was asked, including vets in the Western Isles, who have long sought to raise the issue, and the National Trust for Scotland, which arranged a call with me last week and confirmed that it is carrying out a review, as Tim Eagle said. I believe that the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission is also conducting a review, and that the National Trust for Scotland will liaise with it.”
“I argue, therefore, that not just the sheep on Hirta are suffering; the island itself is suffering from the sheep. Perhaps that is the most relevant point when it comes to the bill. There are comparisons to other locations where sheep and goats are, largely, allowed to live in a wild state but are subject to some human intervention. One is the island of Lundy, off the north coast of Devon, which I have also visited and to which, I understand, some of the same Soay sheep were relocated in 1942. There, sheep continue to be feral but now live in a fairly wild state. However, there is a regular cull, in order to prevent the problems of overpopulation and starvation that are in St Kilda. Another example of limited intervention is the feral goats that live in the Great Orme, a hill beside Llandudno in north Wales.”
“[Laughter.] My key argument is twofold. First, public expectations about animal welfare have moved on since the 1930s, when people left St Kilda and its sheep were moved to Hirta and, effectively, abandoned there. It is my contention that, if those sheep were kept in a field in Angus or Perthshire by Jim Fairlie, Douglas Ross, Edward Mountain or Tim Eagle, that would not be acceptable. Secondly, the island itself is suffering from too many sheep and serious overgrazing. Last summer, I visited Mingulay, which people left in around 1912 and from which all sheep and cattle have been removed. The difference is stark. Mingulay is covered in long grass and other plants, and it seems to be an environment that supports a wide range of flora and fauna.”
“I also spoke to the National Trust for Scotland. Its argument, and that of the Government, is that the sheep are wild, not feral, so are not covered by the Animal Health and Welfare Act (Scotland) Act 2006. However, one of the definitions of a protected animal in the 2006 act is that it is “of a kind ... commonly domesticated in the British Islands”. Sheep are definitely in that category, in my opinion and according to the legal advice that I and the Government have received. I have to say that I was disappointed in the Government’s previous response, which did virtually nothing but restate the Government’s position, which is why I lodged my amendments. I confess that I do not generally agree with amendments appearing out of the blue at stage 3; however, given that I am retiring shortly, I might as well break that rule.”
“I wonder whether the sheep farmers among us find that acceptable. Tim Eagle: As a sheep farmer, I do not find that acceptable. I have discussed the topic at length with the National Trust for Scotland, and my understanding is that it is carrying out a full review and working with the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission, and that a press release will come out in the next few months, following that review. Does John Mason recognise that his amendments are a bit premature and that we should wait for that first? John Mason: We did not even get that much assurance from the Government on 8 January, when I raised the issue, and it is because of the Government’s poor response on that date that I have lodged my amendments in this group, at the suggestion of one of my colleagues, who shall remain nameless.”
“I will focus on my amendments in the group. As members may be aware, their subject is the sheep on St Kilda and especially on the main island of Hirta. That subject landed on my desk recently out of pretty well nowhere. I have visited St Kilda in the past and I consider the islands right up there with other amazing natural phenomena around the world, such as Everest and Victoria falls, which I have also seen. In recent months, however, both BBC Alba and The Herald have reported on the numbers of sheep that are starving to death on the islands each year, with no human intervention whatsoever. From reports that I hear, perhaps 600 sheep are starving to death each year, or 800 if lambs are included, and that has been the case every year for the past 20 years, on average. That is roughly one third of the population on the islands.”
“There is a question about whether the increase will really be £70 million compared with the 2025-26 budget or whether there will be an increase of only £40 million. I note the cabinet secretary’s point that the core budget will increase by £70 million. However, the total budget that will go to colleges will increase by only £40 million, which is a bit unfair. Shona Robison: Will the member take an intervention? The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Mason is just concluding. John Mason: I have nearly finished. Given the fiscal framework that we are subjected to, it is a reasonable budget and I will be supporting it. 16:53”
“We remain unclear about how any extra money will be shared out among local councils. Council tax is a regressive system and, at the very least, we need a complete revaluation. However, my preference is for a tax that is more progressive and closely linked to the actual value of peoples’ homes. Some property prices have increased more than others since 1991, and it remains my strong belief that poorer areas are losing out and increasingly subsidising richer areas. The increase in housing investment is welcome. However, we are still facing a housing emergency, and I wonder whether some other capital expenditure should be trimmed back. I was glad to see an increase in college funding, which was mentioned earlier. For once, I agreed with most of Douglas Ross’s comments, which were fair.”
“I realise that raising taxes is not generally popular, although perhaps more of the public would be willing to support higher taxes if they could see that the money was going to care services, colleges and so on. That brings me to the topic of the general understanding of Scotland’s finances, which has already been mentioned in the debate. The UK has a complex tax system and I accept that, because Scotland must add to an underlying complex system, things here inevitably become even more complicated. However, we need to make an increased effort regarding financial education, be that for young people in schools or for new MSPs after the election. I will move on to a couple of more specific topics. Adding two more council tax bands is not nearly radical enough and will probably not raise a huge amount of money.”
“Clearly, our finances are closely interlinked—that includes the dates of budgets, block grant adjustments, income tax, the building safety levy and so on—and yet, over the past five years, it has proved incredibly difficult to get Treasury ministers to give evidence to the finance committee. I accept that they are primarily answerable to MPs, but that is not a reason to refuse to interact with the Scottish Parliament. Raising taxes overall is essential if we want to have quality public services. That applies to the UK and to Scotland. Most European countries are raising taxes these days, and Scotland and the UK are far from being high-tax countries.”
“The whole purpose of the Barnett formula is to reduce the extra spending that Scotland gets, which was initially based on need. Our needs continue to be greater than in other parts of the UK because of rurality, historically poorer health and an ageing population. However, that is totally ignored by the fiscal framework. Wales probably suffers even more than we do. The previous review of the fiscal framework was minimalist, to say the least. It was not what we had expected and there was next to no parliamentary involvement in it, here or at Westminster. I fully support the Government in seeking a much fuller review with the current UK Government as soon as possible. We should also be interacting much more with Westminster on financial issues.”
“I will touch on a range of topics in my speech. I will start on a positive note about preventative spend, which is a topic that the Finance and Public Administration Committee and others have spent considerable time on over the years. I fully accept that differentiating between preventative and reactive spend is not an exact science. However, I was pleased to see in the Government’s response to the committee that it is “testing a budget tagging method for tracking preventative spend” and that it hopes to have initial results this coming summer. That looks like progress to me. I consider the current fiscal framework to be unfair and biased against Scotland. It requires us to compete with London and the south-east of England, which most nations and regions have historically struggled to do.”
“Increased funding for advice services and improving the take-up of existing benefits were mentioned, especially in relation to pension credit, which can be a passport to other devolved support. The relationship between universal and targeted benefits was raised in evidence, and I note the cabinet secretary’s confirmation that the Scottish Government has no plans to remove any benefits or entitlements from people. We were pleased to hear that the Scottish Government’s chief statistician is working with the UK data-sharing team to streamline data-sharing processes in order to improve access to data about Scotland. 16:20”
“Data on what is driving demand for adult disability payment is vital to inform future spending. We are therefore pleased that the Scottish Government has confirmed that it will publish information on that by the end of next month. The impact of giving people cash payments versus improving public service provision needs to be properly evaluated if money is to be spent as effectively as possible. We welcome the Scottish Government’s confirmation that more analysis is needed and that that will be considered during the development of the third tackling child poverty delivery plan. We also heard evidence about specific changes that could be made to improve people’s circumstances.”
“We considered how the Scottish Government intends to spend the money that was allocated to mitigating the two-child limit, given that the UK Government has now withdrawn that policy. We welcome the confirmation from the cabinet secretary that the money will be invested in other initiatives to tackle poverty, including through additional funding for the Scottish welfare fund, Children First and Aberlour Children’s Charity, alongside a £49 million boost to the tackling child poverty fund. We heard that crucial data that could inform policy for adult disability payment is lacking. Edel Harris OBE, chair of the independent review of adult disability payment, told us that there is not enough information on the impact of ADP on people’s lives, nor is there enough data on the number of disabled people in Scotland.”
“The Scottish child payment is widely supported among stakeholders for the role that it plays in reducing child poverty. We note the announcement that the payment will be increased to £40 for babies under the age of one from 2027- 28. We also heard that the Scottish Government would have increased flexibility over the design of the payment if it were to become a form of childhood assistance as opposed to a top-up to universal credit. We asked the Scottish Government what scope there is for that, and we welcome the cabinet secretary’s confirmation that the Scottish Government is committed to reviewing the legislative footing on which the Scottish child payment is based.”
“We were told at the Finance and Public Administration Committee yesterday that the proportion of people who are being accepted for claims has in fact reduced. It used to be about half; now it is only about a third. Is that having an impact on the costs? Collette Stevenson: Judging from the evidence that we have taken at the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, there is still insufficient data being provided. It is timely that Social Security Scotland representatives are attending our committee meeting tomorrow, so we will follow up on that information to see how effective the payments are in terms of people’s lives. I thank John Mason for that. The forecast increase in social security payments for carers was described as significant.”
“The SFC’s role is to secure coherent and high-quality provision of education and training. It is for the Scottish Government to assess labour market demands and skill shortages with other public bodies, including Skills Development Scotland. That is addressed through my amendment 10, which we discussed in group 1, on a national funding strategy, which will ensure that funding decisions are based on the skills needs in Scotland. For the reasons that I have set out, I cannot support any of the amendments in the group. If Stephen Kerr presses or moves them, I urge other members to vote against them.”
“Ben Macpherson: Daniel Johnson’s point is well made, and I was seeking to emphasise that point when I specifically mentioned upskilling and reskilling. Given the technological change that we will experience in the 21st century economy, the need to upskill and reskill will only become more important. We want to create opportunities for our people to do that where and when it is appropriate and right for them. Employers ultimately decide whether they can take on apprentices. In more difficult economic conditions, businesses might be reluctant to hire, making it harder to deliver the desired number of apprenticeship starts that would be required by amendment 44. Amendment 86 would require the SFC to undertake a labour market assessment. As I explained at stage 2, that is not a task that fits with the SFC’s statutory role.”
“Amendment 44 brings back another proposal that Stephen Kerr made at stage 2. Again, the principle of year-on-year growth in the number of apprenticeships is laudable, but, in practice, various factors that affect apprenticeship numbers sit outside the control of Government. Those factors include the population available for apprenticeships, which is dependent on the population of young people continually growing, and the number of other people who are seeking to retrain and upskill. Daniel Johnson: The minister mentioned growth being contingent on the number of young people who are available. It is really important that we expand the apprenticeship and skills system to deliver upskilling and reskilling, so that apprenticeships can deliver for older people as well. Will the minister reflect on that point?”
“Ben Macpherson: When we were discussing these matters at an earlier juncture, I referred to considerations that the SFC must have regard to in relation to the Equality Act 2010. I also spoke in group 1 about the national funding strategy that we will put into law should the bill be passed. Embedding amendment 43’s provision in primary legislation would limit flexibility, because, over time, we might find that a streamlined set of broader frameworks delivers better outcomes than an expanding collection of highly specialised ones. For example, a single overarching health professions framework could, hypothetically, be more efficient than a series of individual frameworks for each discipline. We do not want to tie future Governments into a fixed arrangement, as Paul O’Kane emphasised.”
“Amendments 41 and 42 would introduce selective provision. Such a targeted approach would be at odds with the SFC’s broader duty to secure coherent provision across the system. Under the 2005 act, there are important matters that the SFC must have regard to when doing so. There are some significant amendments to those matters in group 12, which we will come to later. Stephen Kerr: In relation to my amendment 41, what underpinnings are there for the Scottish Funding Council to consider “unemployed persons... persons seeking to change careers, and... persons at risk of labour market exclusion”? At the moment, those things are not within the purview of the SFC. How does the minister believe that any of those groups of people will even be a consideration in the allocation of funding, apprenticeships and places?”
“It is also assumed in the amendment that apprenticeships or work-based learning are the most suitable options for young people who are not already engaged, but they might wish for and be better suited to other forms of education or training. Amendments 41, 42, and 43 are in the same vein as the amendments that were lodged at stage 2. Amendment 41 seeks to target apprenticeships to specific groups, for example those who are excluded from the labour market; amendment 42 seeks to “promote and support” school-to-work transitions; and amendment 43 seeks to ensure that steps are taken “to expand the range and number of graduate apprenticeship frameworks”, with a focus on sectors that are “experiencing skills shortages”. I agree with the underlying principles of those amendments. However, there are several reasons why I cannot support them.”
“Mr Kerr stressed at stage 2 that many young people fall through the cracks, so to speak, which is something that we must all constantly consider and improve the circumstances around. I think that his amendment 39 has the same aim as his stage 2 amendment, which is to provide equality of opportunity and ensure that unmet demand in the apprenticeship system is addressed. He emphasised those points in his comments today. I am sympathetic to his intent but, as I said to the committee at stage 2, it would be difficult for any Government to guarantee those aims, particularly because they depend on employers being able to provide sufficient jobs, apprenticeships and work-based learning.”
“I believe that his intentions are well motivated and I know that he is keen on accountability, outcomes and delivery. I could not agree more, but the question is how best to achieve those aims. I will support his amendment 50, which we worked on together, when we come to it in a later group. That amendment will ensure that the SFC is accountable and focused on outcomes through enhanced reporting. However, the amendments in group 9 raise issues that were already debated at stage 2. During that debate, Stephen Kerr argued that Scotland’s education system often places disproportionate emphasis on university pathways and that it overlooks young people who are “not academically inclined”. He has repeated some of those points with different words today.”
“There is clearly much more to do to get to where we want to be on apprenticeships and apprenticeship starts. I do not think that, at this stage of the parliamentary session, the bill will effect the change that we need. Members will not be surprised to hear me say that it is a change of Government that would make a difference. There are a variety of pieces of legislation at this stage of the parliamentary session that will not create the change that is required, which I am sure that we will hear more about as we proceed to the debate on the bill. Ben Macpherson: I thank Stephen Kerr for his engagement on the bill at stage 2 and when we met this month. I know that Mr Kerr is keen to see tangible benefits from the bill and to ensure that those will be delivered.”
“I just do not know whether putting it in the bill will deliver that in its totality and in reality. I worry that it could create hostages to fortune, in a way, or that additional layers of bureaucracy might come in as a result of, for example, amendment 86’s call for labour market assessment. I would expect that to be part of any national funding strategy, which we have already debated this afternoon. Mr Kerr is shaking his head—perhaps he does not have the same faith that I do in relation to this. “Not at all,” he is saying. However, I think that that would be the expectation of whoever is sitting in the Government seats after the election. That should be a priority when looking very clearly at the funding strategy. That brings me to my broad view of the themes in the amendments.”
“Stephen Kerr: I am sure that Paul O’Kane must realise that, in saying what he is saying, he is in a way contradicting the point that Daniel Johnson made in his intervention on me. Unless the bill requires the Funding Council to take care of certain matters, the flexibility that he is calling for might lead to an increase in the current disparity of esteem. Paul O’Kane: That takes us back to my earlier points about things that go in the bill. I genuinely think that there are matters of policy and there are matters of legislation and, very often in this Parliament, we conflate some of those matters by thinking that we can legislate our way into ensuring that policy is done well—and, crucially, funded well. I think that we are in concert today about whether ever-upward expansion should be something that we absolutely aspire to.”
“It is why we must address unmet need in Scotland’s apprenticeship system by boosting funding for apprenticeships, so that every qualified applicant in priority sectors and occupations can be guaranteed a place. Although I welcome the intent behind the amendments in this group to increase the number and scope of apprenticeships and to deal with the lack of opportunities for many of Scotland’s young people, I have some specific concerns around amendments 43, 44 and 86 in relation to whether we should tie the hands of the council into the future to permanently expand the range and scope number. We might want to err on the side of ensuring flexibility in the system to allow the council to be responsive to the needs that will emerge and develop.”
“Indeed, recent research by Scottish Engineering found that 20 per cent of skills demand has been unmet “due to real-terms funding cuts to apprenticeships in Scotland.” That is why we have advocated, both during the bill process and more widely, for alignment of college funding with skills need, industrial strategy and employment outcomes, and to give colleges more independence and flexibility, particularly in terms of their finances, to unlock more co- investment from industry. That is also why we are supportive of reform to skills delivery and careers advice, to empower regional collaboration and leadership to ensure that Scotland’s skills delivery matches local business needs—again, much of this has been spoken about in relation to many of the amendments.”
“Many of the reflections that we have heard in the debate so far are really important, not just in relation to young people in the skills system but in relation to the importance of the breadth and depth of apprenticeships across lifelong learning and across the opportunities that are provided for everyone. We are concerned, and have been concerned for some time, about the lack of data on colleges, which means that there is not a clear understanding of how many qualified apprenticeship applicants are being turned away or how that relates to the needs that industry puts forward and advocates for. What we do know is that learning providers requested 34,000 starts in 2024-25, for example, compared with actual starts of around 25,000. We also know that there are major skills shortages across the economy.”