Jenny Gilruth
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“I thank Pam Gosal for bringing this debate to Parliament and for sponsoring the recent round-table discussion on the topic, which I was pleased to attend, along with colleagues from across the Parliament. There is now a growing consensus on the issue.”
“Back in 2024, the Government published updated national guidance in which I was clear that any headteacher would have my full backing as Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills should they see fit to implement a ban, but that decision was ultimately left to headteachers’ discretion.”
“As a result of Parliament’s close scrutiny, I believe that we have produced a stronger bill that is consistent with the initial intentions behind it.”
“I thank Daniel Johnson for his commitment in bringing forward the legislation on restraint and seclusion that is before us today. I applaud his approach to working with the Government and I encourage more such good behaviour in the coming parliamentary session.”
“The Education, Children and Young People Committee’s stage 1 report and members’ speeches in the stage 1 debate highlighted clear support for the bill’s general principles.”
“That principle, which underpinned the national guidance that was issued in 2024, remains central today. The Scottish Government’s original intention was to conclude the review of our 2024 guidance before determining whether legislation was required.”
The complete record
Every one of 653 lines we hold for Jenny Gilruth, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 14.
“Colleges have told the Education, Children and Young People Committee that, in the absence of sustainable funding for colleges, the range of opportunities for the poorest learners will be further reduced and that communities will be left further behind. We see the impact of that in falling retention rates in universities and colleges for the most deprived people and those from the poorest backgrounds. Lastly, we know that childcare is crucial to lifting families and children out of poverty, but discretionary funding through the higher education childcare fund has been cut. None of that is inevitable. We can and must change direction and close the opportunity gap for young people in Scotland. We cannot allow our focus, ambition and action to narrow to one-off solutions or, worse still, to promises that are never delivered.”
“The First Minister said that he had written off school meals debt but, on 7 November last year, the cabinet secretary admitted in an answer to me that, at that time, no funding from the school meal debt fund had been issued to local authorities. It is not just schools that matter: colleges are crucial, too. That is why it beggars belief that the budget delivers a real-terms cut to colleges. Those colleges support the people who are furthest behind. They provide accessible education and skills development, create pathways to employment and boost incomes in the most disadvantaged communities. They equip students with the skills that they need and support people into the well-paid jobs that are key to reducing child poverty.”
“The member will recognise that the draft budget proposes an additional funding settlement for local authorities to help to increase teacher numbers. Why is the Labour Party abstaining on that increase to improve the number of teachers in Scotland’s schools? Pam Duncan-Glancy: The cabinet secretary knows fine well that that is not how the budget process works and that it is not a case of picking and choosing individual parts of the budget. The cabinet secretary is hiding behind the fact that her Government said that it would increase teacher numbers when, in fact, it has reduced them, and it now only intends to maintain them. On free school meals, the Government once said that it would roll out universal provision for all primary school children, but that is now stopping at primary 5.”