Official Report 972KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-16170, in the name of Miles Briggs, on delivering school environments where it is safe for pupils to learn and teachers to teach. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak button. I remind members that we are very tight for time across this debate and the next one.
14:52
Last night, I met teachers in Edinburgh at an event that was organised by the Edinburgh branch of the Educational Institute of Scotland to hear first hand about the pressures that teachers in the capital are facing in our classrooms. They spoke of emergency and crisis levels of violence and abuse, and they shared stories of teachers going off on sick leave due to stress and needing to go to accident and emergency departments for broken bones following violent incidents in their schools. Attacks on teachers and pupils in our schools are totally unacceptable and must stop.
It is clear that there is cross-party concern and, I hope, cross-party consensus on the need for more action and leadership to address the on-going increase in cases of violence against pupils and teachers. The need for action to restore positive learning environments, in which all young people and teachers are safe to learn or teach in a respected and supported setting, is a pressing issue and should be ministers’ number 1 priority.
The Scottish Conservatives have led the debate on school discipline. In March last year, we secured a debate on ending violence in schools. As today’s motion states, we welcome the work that ministers have undertaken as a result of that debate, but we need to be honest that it is not delivering the change that we need in our classrooms and schools, and it is not being delivered at any pace.
Unions have warned that there has been a failure of local authorities and Education Scotland to do anything significant to embed the national action plan on relationships and behaviour in schools. Teachers, pupils and parents are crying out for ministers to take action and to provide leadership to turn the situation around.
Today’s debate therefore presents an opportunity for a reset of our school environment, which I believe is needed. Many schools can be—and are—great learning environments for our young people, teachers and the wider community. However, it is concerning that, in too many cases and too many schools, the school environment is now becoming toxic, with students and teachers experiencing stress, bullying or other negative behaviours that impact on their mental health, wellbeing and ability to learn.
Ministers have acknowledged the rise in the incidence of violence and abuse in our schools and the fact that many cases go unreported. That is why the Scottish Conservatives want common sense policies to be brought back to our classrooms and schools. It is why we are calling for action from ministers today to develop a set of national policies to help to deliver the positive changes that we all want to see and to restore our schools to safe and welcoming learning spaces.
The key questions that teachers raised with me last night is why ministers have not commissioned any work to understand why children are exhibiting such negative behaviours and why schools are not being given the support that they need, increasingly, to address those problematic issues. Above all, teachers want ministers to be clear that they support them in saying that violence in our schools must end and that pupils and parents must be responsible for their actions.
That is why I call on ministers to set a clear national policy on what we should expect in every school—which, it is clear, is the direction that teachers want to see. That includes a ban on mobile phones in the classroom—full stop. It also includes a return to single-sex toilets and accessible toilets in all our schools, and the commissioning of a full independent review of the recording of data into incidents of attacks and violence against school staff.
We want clear guidance and support for teachers. We need the restoration of a situation in which poor behaviour in our classrooms has consequences. The majority of our well-behaved pupils in Scotland cannot continue to have their education negatively impacted. Above all, Scottish National Party ministers need to finally empower teachers to take action against disruptive pupils, knowing that ministers have their back.
Yesterday, I heard a new term that teachers are using: “lappers”. Increasingly, pupils are turning up at school and simply walking around the school or running around the corridors. The situation in our schools will only get worse if we do not get a clear and robust response from ministers. We have called for that, and they said that they would deliver it, but we have not seen action. It is totally unacceptable that more and more pupils and teachers now fear—actually fear—going to school each day. We need an end to the acts of physical and verbal abuse against them.
To date, SNP ministers have failed to put in place the measures that would allow teachers to act against those who are responsible for violence and threats in our schools. We need to acknowledge that, in recent years, the school environment has changed. We need clear national policies to be put in place to deliver for teachers and parents, and we need to ensure that we know what they can accept.
Miles Briggs talks about national policies, but have teachers and headteachers not been given the power to deal with mobile phones, and is that not better dealt with at local level?
There is a huge difference between the guidance that ministers say that councils can develop and, rather than leaving it to individual schools, a national policy that says that we believe that mobile phones should not be in classrooms. There is broad evidence on that.
I will touch on the important issue of social media. There has been an important debate in Australia about the negative impact that social media is having on young people’s mental health. That is why our motion also calls on ministers to undertake a review of the issue in Scotland and look towards a potential ban in that area. We must consider the toxic environment that our young people are living in and how we can change that.
Schools must be a safe place for pupils to learn and for teachers to teach. That is simply not the case right now, and it will only get worse if SNP ministers do not get a grip of the situation. I am clear—let me be clear to any teacher watching the debate—that the Scottish Conservatives support our teachers 100 per cent in demanding fresh action to restore discipline in our schools. That must be the number 1 priority for SNP ministers. They must be judged over the next year on their actions, and we will continue to press the Government for that action.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the ongoing concern at reported cases of violence against pupils and staff, and disruption in schools, and the need for action to help restore positive learning environments in which all young people and teachers are safe to learn and teach in a respectful and supported setting; welcomes the publication of the joint national action plan with COSLA in August 2024, which set out a range of actions needed to be taken at both local and national levels to address violence in schools, alongside the Scottish Government’s action plan on tackling violence and verbal abuse in schools; calls on ministers to bring forward an update to the Parliament on how these actions are being taken forward; further calls on ministers to review the reporting and publication of data on incidents relating to violence and harassment in schools; notes the disparity in the availability of early years provision across Scotland and the potential long-term impacts on children’s development and educational outcomes; calls for a review to identify and mitigate negative influences on learning environments in primary schools, including factors affecting pupil behaviour and engagement; further calls on the Scottish Government to support children and young people impacted by violence and disruption in schools and to facilitate an environment in which all young people are safe to learn, develop and grow; notes the publication of the Scottish Government guidance on mobile phones in schools, and calls on ministers to take forward a national policy on a ban on mobile phones in classrooms and the provision of single-sex toilets and accessible toilets in all schools; acknowledges the recent passing of a law banning children under 16 from using social media in Australia, and calls on ministers to undertake a review in Scotland of the negative impact of social media on young people and the growing body of evidence suggesting that “over-exposure” to mobile phones and social media can result in pupils experiencing limited concentration, isolation and poor mental health, as well as the potential for a similar ban in Scotland.
14:59
I am grateful to the Scottish Conservatives for securing the debate. I am keen to speak to the measures included in their motion in relation to my ministerial responsibilities. In closing the debate, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills will focus on specific actions for schools.
The motion references early learning and childcare provision and refers to “disparity” in provision. I would respectfully challenge that point. The Scottish Government continues to invest around £1 billion a year into delivering 1,140 hours of funded ELC to all eligible children. Scotland is the only part of the United Kingdom to already offer 1,140 hours a year of funded ELC to all three and four-year-olds and eligible two-year-olds, regardless of their parents’ working status. Families across Scotland have been benefiting from that provision since 2021. However, I recognise that there are pressures—
Will Natalie Don-Innes take an intervention?
Yes, I will.
The minister says that she takes umbrage with the word “disparity”. Probably every member in the Parliament will have written to Government ministers to say that people cannot get the nursery choices that they want. Why is there an issue when we highlight the disparity that clearly exists across our country?
I am going to speak about some of the challenges.
In one of the most recent surveys that was undertaken on ELC, 97 per cent of parents were satisfied with the quality of ELC that they were receiving. However, I recognise that there are challenges. I have spoken to members about inconsistencies in rates and other matters, and I continue to work on those. I recognise that ELC providers in Scotland face pressure in relation to the £5 million burden arising from the UK Government’s increase in the employer national insurance contribution. In relation to flexibility of provision, we know that there are differing models of ELC delivery in local authorities. That is why we will continue to work with local government and sector partners to ensure that the 1,140 offer meets families’ needs.
Turning to the measures in Miles Briggs’s motion that relate to factors influencing behaviour and engagement, I must challenge his characterisation of schools and our children. Often, we need to look a bit deeper to understand why a child or young person might act in a certain way. Respondents to the Scottish Government’s behaviour in Scottish schools research in November 2023 cited societal factors, such as poverty and deprivation, and challenges associated with home and family life, such as trauma and adverse childhood experiences, as the root causes of disruptive behaviour.
We must strike a balance between in-school approaches to promoting positive behaviour alongside the external factors that might influence behaviour. That is why I am committed to whole-family wellbeing and to prioritising services that help families to thrive, stay together and avoid crisis points, which might later impact on a child or young person’s school experience.
Will Natalie Don-Innes take an intervention?
Can I get the time back, Deputy Presiding Officer?
No, not really.
Furthermore, my work on the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024 means that I take very seriously Miles Briggs’s reference in the motion to supporting
“children and young people impacted by violence”.
I was happy to work with members from across the chamber to strengthen the provisions in the 2024 act.
Childcare improvements remain a shared priority across Government. Last week, the First Minister’s cross-party youth justice summit involved the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, members from across the chamber, youth justice organisations and young people who have been impacted by violence. I was struck by comments from Jimmy Paul, the head of the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit, who said:
“There was a real commitment to reducing violence in Scotland and the issue was not politicised. It was a step in the right direction to tackling violence in Scotland—it is the start of the conversation and it will look at the root causes and drivers of violence, not just the act itself. Everybody in the room from experts, young people and politicians, were on the same page”.
It is in that spirit that we should go forward together as a Parliament. We owe it to our young people not to use incidents of youth violence as political footballs. Scotland’s approach to confronting and correcting youth offending is effective and proven. Scotland needs to stay alert to emerging issues and respond on the basis of evidence. That is how we minimise the number of future victims and how we turn around young lives.
Across the chamber, we are committed to ensuring that our children and young people are nurtured and free to grow up safe. They should be protected from harms and harassment in their day-to-day lives, which includes online. When browsing the internet, children can be exposed to cyberbullying, violent content, sexualised material and hate speech, including messages that incite violence or encourage toxic masculinity. Exposure to such content is putting our children at risk. That is why I am pleased to inform the Parliament that the First Minister has asked me to work with the Minister for Victims and Community Safety to create a new task force to identify what more can be done within the limits of devolution to protect children and young people from online harms—[Interruption.]
The reaction from members on the Conservative benches is appalling. [Interruption.]
Let us hear the minister.
The First Minister has also written to the UK Government to voice his support for joint working between our Governments to improve online safety. I sincerely hope that members from across the chamber support that endeavour. It will take all of us—Government, Parliament, local authorities, agencies, schools, teachers and organisations—working together.
I hope that today’s debate provides an opportunity to explore what more can be done collectively.
I move, as an amendment to motion S6M-16170, to leave out from first “calls on ministers” to end and insert:
“recognises the importance of the Scottish Government and local authorities working together to facilitate an environment in which all young people are safe to learn, develop and grow; notes the Scottish Government national guidance on mobile phones in schools, which empowers headteachers to take decisions on banning mobile phone use in schools; agrees with the importance of ensuring that children are protected from online harms; notes the importance of ensuring that children and young people are able to share their perspective on their education, and calls on all partners to continue working closely with the Scottish Government to improve behaviour and relationships in schools.”
15:04
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests.
We have returned to the issue many times, but the situation persists. NASUWT has said that teachers fear for their safety and the GMB has called the situation a “national emergency”, so our focusing on it today is crucial.
We welcome the publication of the joint national action plan, echo calls for ministers to bring forward an update and urge the Government to review the reporting and publication of data on the issue. We also welcome the mobile phones guidance, but more is needed, including on the impact of phones and social media on violence against women and girls. I look forward to hearing more about the task force, but we need more than just a task force—we need action in schools and across communities.
The issue that we are discussing is far wider than all that, but we cannot address it without also considering the workforce and the need for strong public services around young people. The motion and other amendment do not include that detail, so I will set out why I believe that it is crucial. Cases of violence against pupils and staff and disruption in schools have escalated, which is unacceptable. It is worrying that it looks as though the lowest-paid staff, and women and girls, face the brunt of it.
GMB data suggests that women workers are more often subjected to incidents involving violence, and Time for Inclusive Education focus groups have heard from girls that misogyny, homophobia and racism are “rife”. They also heard that body shaming is common, that rape jokes are minimised and that some girls do not want to eat in school due to sexualised comments being made by boys. Other girls do not want to go to school at all. That all affects girls’ mental health and attention span.
The focus groups all indicated what members of the Scottish Youth Parliament backed up at the Education, Children and Young People Committee this morning—that social media can be unsafe places, with content from popular figures, memes and videos normalising misogyny, anti-LGBT prejudice, racism and violence. Young people told the committee this morning that they want more support on the issue at school, so I encourage the minister and the cabinet secretary to look at the Mind Yer Time campaign, as a start.
I also urge the cabinet secretary to consider that in the context of the growing body of evidence that highlights the role of phones in the problem. There is evidence that overexposure to social media can influence attitudes as well as resulting in people experiencing limited concentration, isolation and poor mental health.
Young people also said this morning that when we discuss violence and its impact, we also have to consider the wider context, which our amendment seeks to do. Without addressing the systemic and structural issues that schools face, classrooms will continue to be like pressure cookers, with overworked staff and unsupported pupils. The Educational Institute of Scotland has said that teachers are working on average 11 hours extra per week unpaid, and they are still waiting for reduced contact time. We cannot address violence in schools in isolation from those issues. That is why we urgently need the Government to publish the comprehensive workforce plan that will address gaps in the teaching and school staff workforce, which Parliament voted for last May.
Will the member give way?
Will I get my time back, Deputy Presiding Officer?
No.
I am sorry, but I am unable to take the intervention.
The Government must also address long waits and gaps in provision of key public services, including child and adolescent mental health services, educational psychology and speech and language therapy. Nearly one in six children and young people who needed treatment waited more than four months for help. There is also growing prevalence of communication needs among children, with 6,000 waiting for speech and language therapy and 53 per cent of those waiting more than 18 weeks.
We have to address all that if we are serious about the school environment. That means finding ways to support joint working between education and the national health service, so that things such as speech and language therapy are positioned closer to education services and to the child.
All that can have a detrimental impact on the school environment, and MSYPs echoed that this morning, saying that we have faced years of real-terms cuts to the NHS, cuts to youth work and cuts to community services. We are seeing the degradation of community services all round, and we are left with the inevitable result that education needs to pick up the slack.
That is why we must take a broader view of the issue. It is also why we support the committee’s finding that we need to design school buildings that are accessible and welcoming environments.
You need to close.
We believe that that includes classroom design, and the availability of single-sex, accessible, gender-neutral and changing places toilets, because no one can learn if they cannot access a private, safe and accessible toilet.
I move amendment S6M-16170.2, to leave out from “the disparity” to end and insert:
“that the GMB union has described the environment in schools as a ‘national emergency’, and that reports from NASUWT state that teachers in Scotland ‘fear for their safety’; further notes the concerns raised by teaching unions, such as EIS, that teachers are working, on average, 11 hours per week unpaid; is concerned about the evidence of the impact of violence, particularly on women and girls, in schools; believes that this situation is not sustainable; considers that adequate staffing is required to create a safe environment in schools, and calls on the Scottish Government to publish a comprehensive plan to address gaps in the teaching and school staff workforce, as voted for by the Parliament on 15 May 2024; believes that long waits and gaps in the provision of public services, such as child and adolescent mental health services, educational psychology and speech and language therapy, have a detrimental impact on the school environment, and particularly children with additional support needs; welcomes the Equally Safe delivery plan, which gives direction to the Equally Safe at School programme; supports the finding in the Education, Children and Young People Committee’s report on additional support for learning that the Scottish Government and the Scottish Futures Trust should work with local authorities ‘to ensure that schools are designed as accessible and welcoming environments for all’, and believes that this should include classroom design as well as the availability of single-sex, accessible and Changing Places toilets, and calls on ministers to consider the growing body of evidence suggesting that ‘over-exposure’ to social media can result in pupils experiencing limited concentration, isolation and poor mental health, and to bring forward a national policy on how best to address this in Scotland.”
I apologise, but I am afraid that we have no time in hand. Ross Greer—up to four minutes, please.
15:09
The challenge of violence in our schools is very real. One of my frustrations with how the debate has developed over the past couple of years is that young people are almost always spoken about as either the victims or the perpetrators of that violence, and we rarely talk to young people as opposed to talking about them. We need to recognise that young people are absolutely key to the solutions. We heard from members of the Scottish Youth Parliament this morning that they want to talk about the core reasons behind the rise in violence in our schools.
The vast majority of pupils are well behaved the vast majority of the time: recent reports have confirmed that. All staff and pupils deserve to be safe at school. Our schools are certainly not all unsafe all the time, but there is a very real issue. Like most members, I know teachers who have been injured in the workplace throughout their career, but that has been happening far more frequently—and, in some cases, more severely—in the post-pandemic period.
Like the last time we debated this topic, the aspect that I want to focus on is violence against women and girls in schools. I raise the issue again because of my frustration at what I see as a lack of urgency in tackling it. The Zero Tolerance report from two years ago, “Gender inequality and violence against women and girls in Scottish schools” showed that one in five young women and girls felt unsafe at school in Scotland, and two in three had been sexually harassed.
In large part, that is because boys and young men just do not respect girls and women—and, in some cases, they hate them. I have said before that it is a matter that is to be dealt with through the personal and social education curriculum in our schools. I raise that issue because I have worked on it throughout the nine years that I have been a member of Parliament. We recognised the problem nine years ago, and in the period of time that it has taken us to get even this far—and we are nowhere near done with it—the issue has only got worse. The manosphere did not exist nine years ago, and Andrew Tate was not an influencer nine years ago.
I will address specific points on social media later, but I want to talk about the fact that, at the moment, the guidance for teaching sexual education in our schools makes one passing reference to the principle of consent—just one. That guidance is from 2014; it is not decades old. For three years, we have had a draft set of new guidance on how to deliver sex education in schools, which starts off with what our committee called for some years ago—a substantial section on the principle of consent and the importance of respect in relationships and respect for women and girls, in particular. It has been sitting as a draft for years now, and I am frustrated by the lack of progress.
However, I am pleased that, yesterday, I received an answer from the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills to a written question, saying that following the consultation that took place, we will finally get a finalised copy of that guidance in the coming weeks. That is important, because the new guidance starts with that substantial section on consent. It is also inclusive of LGBTQ young people, because we know that queer young people are disproportionately victims of violence in school. Age-and-stage-appropriate guidance for boys and young men on the importance of respect and healthy relationships is absolutely essential if we are to tackle the issue.
I want to talk about the issue again—I bring it up every time we debate the subject—because of my frustration about the fact that it has taken a decade to change just that one guidance document. In this Parliament, we talk a lot about tackling violence against women and girls, but can we seriously say that we are making progress and that we are proud of the progress that we have made when, in order to talk in any depth about the importance of a basic principle such as consent, it has taken a decade to change just one guidance document on one element of education?
This morning, members of the Scottish Youth Parliament confirmed that PSE in our schools is supposed to be co-designed by young people, specifically because of issues raised in relation to sex and relationships education, but that is simply not happening.
I am proud of the progress that we have made in certain areas; however, I am immensely frustrated that I am essentially making the same speech that I make in every one of these debates, because, for nine years now, we have failed to get to grips with what I see as one of the lowest-hanging fruits—one of the easiest areas in which we could make a difference.
15:13
It is too early to judge whether the Scottish Government’s action plan is working, as we have not even got through the first phase of the plan. However, I have not seen any evidence that the action plan is making a practical difference on the ground, so far. I continue to receive reports from parents who are frustrated, angry and feel powerless; from pupils whose education is disrupted; and from teachers who are really frustrated about the lack of support. We must start to see action in this area, or people will lose confidence in the plan’s ability to deliver.
I will make some observations. As a liberal, I always want to understand the root causes of any behaviour and to provide support to address those causes. That is why I am a liberal.
I want to be clear about this. Just because we understand the causes of the violence, that does not make it any more acceptable. There must be consequences for that behaviour, because endless understanding without consequences, support and action does not help the perpetrator, let alone the victim, of that behaviour. Often, I get the impression that some people make excuses for those who engage in violence rather than taking the necessary action and providing support.
My second observation is that teachers need to be empowered, supported and respected. When they are unreasonably challenged by parents, they must have the support of their management. Questioning by management of teachers and circumstances is fair—it is the right thing to do—but management must have the backs of teachers in issues of behaviour in the class. I hear of too many occasions on which the teachers do not bother a second time, because they do not get the necessary support when they are challenged.
I will move on to mobile phones. The evidence for a ban on phones in schools is pretty convincing. They are contributing to disorder and disruption in the class, and they are misused on many occasions. Once we are confident that learning and safety will not suffer—those are two important aspects—we should move towards a nationwide ban.
If the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills needs that power, we should give her that power. Although it is fair that she has given the power to headteachers, that is clearly not enough, because they need to have the support from the centre to deliver something that, in many cases, will be quite controversial.
My final point is on an issue that was raised in the Education, Children and Young People Committee last week—part-time timetables for certain pupils. We heard that some pupils are getting timetables of as little as 15 minutes a week. Sometimes, that is because it is in the interests of the pupil, and that is fine. I get the impression that their getting 15 minutes in school is sometimes done only in the interests of the school. On other occasions, it is 15 minutes because that ticks a box when it comes to keeping the Promise, in that we should not have care-experienced young people being excluded from school.
The experiences will vary from pupil to pupil and from school to school, but people attending the committee last week gave us clear evidence that, on many occasions, part-time timetabling is not being appropriately implemented. I want to make sure that, if there is just 15 minutes in school being provided, the rest of the pupil’s week is populated with support and action, and that they move back to the school in a transitional way. That is important.
15:17
I am grateful to be able to speak on such an important issue. Violent and disruptive behaviour in Scotland’s schools has become an epidemic. In 2023 alone, school staff reported almost 45,000 instances of violence and abuse, with 200 staff being physically or verbally abused every day. Another survey found that 70 per cent of Scottish pupils experience sexual harassment, with 34 per cent experiencing unwanted touching. Think about that for a moment. One in three pupils is being touched against their will, seven in 10 pupils experience harassment of some kind, and a physical or verbal assault against staff takes place every two minutes of a school day.
The violence in Scotland’s schools is out of control. The SNP Government needs to do far more to help teachers to tackle this growing crisis, and my colleague Miles Briggs has already set out some of the actions that it must take.
I want to focus on the impact that that violence is having on young girls. We know that the vast majority of pupils experiencing sexual harassment are girls. We know that 20 per cent of girls no longer feel safe at school and that half of those say that their fear is holding them back in their education.
Last month, I held a round-table session on the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. One of the guests was a teacher who recounted some of the shocking incidents that had taken place at her school. She described boys having a group chat in which they rated girls and photoshopped their heads on to fake bodies. Most appallingly, she said, the boys took advantage of unisex toilets to sneak their phones under the stalls and film girls. Sadly, that is not the first time that such an incident has happened. Recently, a hidden camera that had filmed hundreds of naked girls was found in a unisex toilet stall in a Dundee school. However, when the teacher I spoke to raised concerns about the mixed-sex toilets, she was branded transphobic.
Raising concerns about girls facing sexual harassment in mixed-sex toilets is not transphobic; it is common sense. It is a bare-minimum safeguard that young girls deserve, yet one in 20 schools in Scotland currently offers only mixed-sex facilities, with no single-sex toilets at all. It is no wonder that so many girls feel unsafe at school when even toilets and changing rooms are no longer safe spaces. That is why it is vital that single-sex facilities are available in every school.
The SNP must do more to support teachers to tackle sexual harassment and violence. That includes empowering teachers to discipline violent pupils and put an end to the terror that many girls live with. Schools should be environments where pupils feel safe and enjoy their childhood. Unfortunately, that is not the case in Scotland under the SNP Government. A generation of children are having their education disrupted, while a generation of girls are learning to fear sexual harassment every day. Talking shop will no longer cut it. We need real action to tackle this crisis.
15:21
I welcome the opportunity to speak in this important debate.
I know that we all agree that having a safe place for our young people to learn in and for our teachers to teach in is central to having a successful educational system. I see, from the various amendments to the motion, that we also share the same concerns over reported cases of violence against pupils and staff as well as disruption in schools. Violence and abusive behaviour in schools is completely unacceptable.
I also welcome the publication of the joint national action plan with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, which is mentioned in the amendments and which sets out the actions that will be taken over the next three years in response to the “Behaviour in Scottish schools 2023” research. The action plan states:
“The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 places duties on public authorities which include taking into account the views of the child or young person. Therefore, children and young people should play an integral role in shaping the local policies on relationships and behaviour that will affect them.”
That crucial point could be more prominent both in the debate today and in our overall discussions about education and children’s participation in it. Although working alongside organisations such as Education Scotland and local authorities is important for implementing the action plan, we should genuinely listen to the pupils themselves. They are the ones who experience daily disruption in the classroom, and it is their input that will guide us in creating the safest and most conducive learning environment for both students and teachers.
By involving pupils in the process of shaping their educational experiences, we empower them to become co-creators of their learning journey. That approach not only fosters greater engagement but challenges the traditional power dynamics that often leave students’ needs and views overlooked.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, thanks. There is no time.
When pupils feel that their opinions are valued and taken seriously, they are more likely to feel respected and, as a result, less inclined to act out in the classroom. That shift towards a more inclusive and respectful environment is essential for creating a school culture in which both students and teachers can thrive and in which learning is not only safe but meaningful and effective. Indeed, one of the main points to come out of the recent discussion on the Education (Scotland) Bill at stage 1 was the very issue of ensuring that safety is central to any educational reform, including, I hope, the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In conclusion, if we are to build an environment that is safe for pupils and teachers, we need to involve those who will be using that environment. Therefore, should the Government be minded to produce an update on how the actions are being taken forward, as is called for in Mr Briggs’s motion, I ask it to please ensure that UNCRC article 12—which states that, when adults are making decisions that affect children, they should ask the children what they think—takes centre stage.
15:25
I have always believed that the greatest gift that any society can give a child is access to a good-quality education that gives them the opportunity to achieve and to reach their full potential. Sadly, for too many children in Scotland, that is not happening. When I speak to parents, pupils, teachers and school staff, they all ask me why the politicians in this place and the politicians in councils cannot work together to resolve the issues. That is where people are at. We know that there are problems and serious issues, and we need to find a way to come together to find the solutions, working with schools, teachers and local authorities.
I was therefore disappointed by the speech that the minister just made, in which she warned us about using youth violence as a political football. None of us would be doing our job if we did not come here and raise these issues, which is why I am grateful to the Conservative Party for giving us part of its business time today in which to speak about them. I ask the education secretary to consider having further debates in Government time so that we can look at how we can work together to tackle these issues.
In fairness to the education secretary, she has always been more than willing to acknowledge that there are serious challenges in our schools. This week, I read in The Courier a report of a public meeting in Glenrothes, which I believe the education secretary was at. I have a host of quotes from teachers and parents that highlight some of the very serious problems that people face in our schools. I suggest to the minister that she does not put her head in the sand. The starting point must be to acknowledge the problems and to look at how we are going to tackle them.
I take on board Bill Kidd’s interesting point about the involvement of schools. I had the pleasure of meeting a P7 class from Fallin primary school in Parliament this morning, and I told them about this afternoon’s debate. I said that one of the issues in the discussion would be the fact that, although the Government has issued guidance on the use of phones in schools, many schools would lean towards a total ban, and I explained the procedures for how that would happen. That generated more discussion than I have ever had before when I have met schoolchildren—up went the hands. The majority of the primary 7 pupils did not want to see a ban, and they demanded to know what my view on it was. I told them that I was leaning towards a ban but that I was, of course, going to listen to them.
Fallin primary school’s phone policy is that children have to hand their phones in at the start of the day. They get them back at lunchtime and then hand them in again after lunch. I was informed that a high school in Stirling has banned phones completely. I say to the cabinet secretary that we need to look at how that initiative is going and how it works.
We need more additional support teachers, more assistant support teachers and more learning support teachers in schools. That is what the education establishment, teachers and schools are telling us. It is good that we are making some progress, but we clearly have problems. We need more resources, more teachers and more learning support teachers. That is the way to move forward.
15:29
We have heard the concerns about violence in our schools, including in primary schools. Physical and verbal abuse is an issue in primary schools, as it is in secondary schools. As we have heard, mobile phones are not just a teenage problem, as 62 per cent of eight-year-olds own one. That means that younger children have the same access to negative influences and developmental anxieties as their counterparts do.
In 2023-24, there were 3,170 incidents of violence in schools in the Highlands. That means that there has been a 548 per cent increase in four years, and the figures equate to 16 incidents every day. Does Roz McCall believe that teachers want action, not more task forces?
Yes.
Let children be children. They should grow up in a state of innocence—it is called “childlike” innocence for a reason—but for many children in Scotland, that is not the case. They are burdened by pressures that their young minds cannot comprehend. Schools should be a glorious respite from that. If we give a child the time and space for their mind to develop in a safe and psychologically sensitive way, they will cope far better with the trials of life in later years.
However, that space varies greatly depending on what part of the country the child lives in. Families across Scotland face a postcode lottery when it comes to accessing the 1,140 hours of funded childcare, regardless of the minister’s earlier comments. Funding issues for local authorities mean that some offer funded childcare immediately following a child’s third birthday, some offer it a month after a child’s third birthday and some delay it until the following school term. Some local authorities take children who come from a different council area because their parents work nearby, but some refuse to do so. There is disparity in the offer, which is adversely affecting working parents and, subsequently, their children.
When I became a mum, I was given the advice that it was my job to ensure that my child was never put in a situation that they could not handle. Unfortunately, we do that every day. Not a single girl who attended school with my daughters did not have a negative reaction to primary 2 food and nutrition education. Food became bad, and the fear of a note coming home from a teacher about insignificant vegetable content was almost palpable. Every seven-year-old I met at that time became worried about what they ate. Food was no longer fuel to be run off at play time but a source of anxiety. Now, we have expanded food guidance to nurseries, where birthday cakes are a thing of the past, with the unintended consequences being that even younger children will be made to worry about what they eat.
Equally, we are starting to force sexualisation on children. Children are children. Young boys playing with dolls and wearing pink frilly dresses is absolutely normal, as is girls climbing trees and building bridges. Their imaginations are firing, and limits do not apply—and nor should they.
It is therefore deeply concerning that groups such as LGBT Youth Scotland are infiltrating our primary schools. This morning, I checked LGBT Youth’s website, where it proudly states that it is
“Scotland’s national charity for LGBTQ+ young people, aged 13-25.”
I am all for support being provided to those in that age range when it comes to sexual issues and worries—although I might now have concerns about that particular organisation—but there are no 13 to 25-year-olds in primary schools.
Experts are warning of the lasting psychological danger of introducing young children to material on trans ideology. Former Scottish Government adviser and educational psychologist Carolyn Brown said:
“Children struggle with their bodies during puberty. Without harmful ideology influences, they grow into who they are meant to be. LGBT Youth Scotland believe those struggling with puberty are born in the wrong body. This causes lasting psychological harm, sending children down an irreversible road of medication and surgery.”
Primary school is neither the right place nor the right time for children to be worried about that. It is time to let children be children.
15:33
In such debates, I normally look at the Opposition party’s motion to try to find something to talk about, because the motions are normally pretty tight and on a specific issue. Today’s motion is about everything. I am not moaning about that, but it gives me the opportunity to talk about anything that I want to talk about in the education environment.
I accept that it is challenging for teachers, pupils and others in the school environment. To a certain degree, it has always been thus. I remember it being like that when I was younger, and that was not yesterday. On the whole, that is not what I experience when I go out to schools in my constituency of Paisley. For example, I recently visited a school to see an anti-alcohol play that was being done for first years—don’t use alcohol, kids. Because of the relationship that I had with the school, I was asked to go to the modern studies class and talk to the pupils about something. In fact, they helped me with a speech that I made in the Parliament the next day. Apparently, one of them bragged that I used one of their lines.
The MSYPs who were at the Education, Children and Young People Committee today talked about how we and education authorities engage with them. They were almost offended when Miles Briggs brought up the issue of violence in schools, because they felt that young people were getting the blame for the whole scenario. That is one of the things that we must be careful of in a debate such as this. The MSYPs want us to engage with them—they want to talk about the education environment and how we can work together to make it better for them.
One of the questions that I asked the MSYPs was about the pressure on them in relation to social media, and that was when they lit up about the whole debate. I understand why we talk about banning mobile phones in schools when they become a distraction and a problem there, but the Scottish Government has done its bit to empower headteachers with the power to take away phones.
There is a balance to be struck. One of the young women who was at the committee today mentioned that she has a health condition and that it could become a bit of a problem if she did not have access to her phone. We need to be more flexible and discuss the issue with a wee bit of maturity and not just stick to our political lines and shout at each other from various parts of the chamber.
The MSYPs mentioned, in particular, the pressure that is created by social media and the occasions on which they feel that they are being pushed. Some of them might be triggered when they are in class or in school by something that has been said on social media. However, the big thing for them was the societal issues. Behaviour changes are made because of societal issues, and they said that they were willing to work with every one of us to try to make that difference in our society. What I saw today were young people who were willing to engage with the political process to make that difference, so we need to be careful when we highlight individuals and say, “Young people are the problem—they’re creating all the violence; there’s an issue there.”
I acknowledge that our teachers need to work in a safe environment and that they work in a challenging one; I know that we must have a safe environment for our young people. All that we have to do is ensure that everyone sits down in sobriety and has that conversation so that we can make the difference and change things. That, for me, is the whole point of the debate, not the yah-boo politics from some.
15:38
Our schools must be places where our children can thrive and where our teachers can excel. Too many classrooms are undermined by disruption and sometimes even by violence. I fear that they are lacking clear, decisive policy that is backed up by strong leadership. The wellbeing of pupils and teachers alike is sometimes at risk, and that must change.
Strong leadership begins here, with all of us in the Parliament—that is a theme that has developed over the debate—and with our taking responsibility for the safety and success of our schools. Schools are our children’s first independent communities; they teach children things about respect, conflict management and the shared values that underpin our society. Yet I feel that many schools have been left ill-equipped to address the challenges that they are facing, which the pandemic has exacerbated. I must be very clear with the Government that empowering headteachers without providing robust national support to underpin that empowerment is—I am sorry to say—not leadership but passing the buck.
We have to ensure that our schools have clear policies and protection and that we are enforcing consistent behavioural standards. Mobile phones are rightly being discussed—they are clearly having an impact on our young people’s mental health and we need to focus more on them. We know that smoking, drugs and alcohol cause harm, and I believe that we are approaching the point at which we understand that the use—or overuse, I should say—of mobile phones and social media is also harmful to our young people and to their mental health.
We did not leave the smoking ban up to the discretion of venue managers, and neither should we leave the issue of mobile phones in classrooms up to individual schools. A nationwide ban is now necessary, and it should be brought forward as quickly as possible to safeguard the learning and wellbeing of our children. The Government needs to step up; its suggestion of a task force is just not going to cut it.
We now move to closing speeches.
15:40
In closing, I will round off the points that I made earlier on the importance of personal and social education in tackling violence against women and girls and on co-design by young people themselves, which is absolutely essential. Teachers have given us clear feedback that that is what they need. In many cases, they are not on the same social media platforms as their pupils, and, if they are, the algorithm shows them something completely different, so they are simply not aware of what young men and boys in particular are seeing online.
Most PSE is not delivered by subject specialists. It is not fair for us to expect a geography teacher or a biology teacher who is trying to keep on top of their own specialism to also keep on top of areas such as developments in the manosphere and the new wave of misogyny.
Young people want to help to solve this; we heard that in the Education, Children and Young People Committee this morning. If areas such as sex and relationship education and PSE overall are co-designed by young people, they can be kept up to date with the challenges that young people face. The issue with this part of the curriculum has so often been that it becomes outdated very quickly and that teachers in classrooms simply do not have the time to keep on top of it.
We need to seriously consider subject specialism in this area. There are a few schools in Scotland that deliver PSE through subject specialists, as opposed to teachers from other areas taking either one period per day or a couple of periods per week to deliver it.
Bill Kidd got it absolutely right when he said that pupils feel more “respected” when their views are taken on board. They feel more like they are part of the school community. Co-design results in better learning and better behaviour, and it is better for staff as well.
Edward Mountain made an important point highlighting the rise in incidents of violence in schools in the Highlands—I think that he mentioned a 500-ish per cent increase. That is in large part a real increase, but it is also in part an increase in the reporting of a level of violence that was always there but previously went underreported or misreported.
Parliament has previously taken evidence on schools not accurately recording such incidents because they wanted to protect their reputation. Say that a school did not want a reputation for having a problem with misogyny, so it put an incident down as a generic incident of difficult pupil behaviour. That makes it harder for us to get a grip on the problem. That is still a lingering issue; reporting has improved, but the issue has not been entirely resolved.
I want to talk about one area in which I think we have made progress, regarding mental health support and counselling in schools. Although the challenges with CAMHS have certainly not been tackled, we have seen a significant increase in access to mental health support for young people in school. The recent six-monthly reports that we get showed that 10,000 young people were accessing that support, then 12,000 and then 14,000. The service is meeting a level of demand that was always there. It would be wrong to suggest that all incidents of violence in schools are simply because of mental ill health, but there is clearly a link between those two issues, and so that support is absolutely essential.
On the issue of phones in schools, I would absolutely be in favour of an outright ban on phones in classrooms, but I am uncomfortable with the idea of a complete ban on having them on school grounds, because of the issues that some members have mentioned, such as the fact that one of the reasons why a lot of young people have a phone, particularly at a younger age, is to ensure their safety when they are getting to and from school. In practice, if phones are banned from school grounds, that would prevent them from having their phone on that journey.
It is true that social media causes harm to young people. However, it causes harm to people of all ages, and the people who are most likely to fall for misinformation and conspiracy theories are not sitting in school—they are far older than that, and we, as adults, need to face up to that. However, there are also positives from social media for young people, in particular for isolated young people, who can find a community that they would not otherwise have found. I know that that is the experience of a lot of LGBT young people in particular.
In closing, all that I would say is that what is essential here is that we build community and create belonging. Young people deserve that, and they will respond with respect to it.
We have no time in hand. Martin Whitfield has up to four minutes.
15:44
I hear your suggestion, Deputy Presiding Officer.
I draw attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as a former teacher.
This has been a fascinating debate, and I had a beautifully prepared speech for it, but I want to move away from that, because of what we have heard this afternoon. As George Adam highlighted in opening his speech, the wideness of the motion has allowed people to speak about anything in relation to education—and members have done that. That is important, as the debate has been a nuanced one, with a lot of causes, some solutions and a lot of questions that still need to be answered, in particular in relation to data.
We have heard evidence that there are cases where schools and individual teachers, for a variety of reasons, some of which have merit, have chosen not to report violent acts or to report them in a different way, so as to preserve the reputations of others. The call in the motion for a better discussion about what data is collected and how it is collected is important, although I am concerned about kicking that down the road to another task force. We know what the data is; the challenge is in how the Government can collect it and how it can ensure that it is robust.
I was very much impacted by Roz McCall’s speech in which she talked about the importance of childhood. One of the things that gets missed—and this speaks to Ross Greer’s concern about children being blamed for the violence that takes place—is the issue of whether there is a loss of childhood now. The childhood that our young people are going through now is very different from the childhood that almost everybody sitting in the chamber went through.
We talk about the algorithms that show us things on our social media, which are very different from those that are shown to our young people. Who is looking to capture that data? Who is getting under the bonnet to see what our young people are being exposed to?
I am pleased that so many members, including Pam Gosal, Pam Duncan-Glancy and Ross Greer, raised the question of violence against women and girls. We are now at a point where the situation is not just about violence in schools but about violence that is deliberately being stirred up and perpetrated against certain groups. That needs to be addressed. Some solutions have been put forward, but much more work needs to be done.
In the short time that I have, I wish to capture an important element that was raised by Bill Kidd, on articles 12 and 13 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Sitting within the convention is one of the solutions that the Government, and others in elected bodies such as local authorities and in schools, could take much further: involving our children and young people in determining what the solutions are. It is necessary for them to be there not only when the decisions are being made or when the talks are being given; their involvement should not be seen as a one-off. If we involve our children and young people in the solutions, they can express the experiences that they are having—they can tell us what it is like. They can also suggest the answers.
That may respond to the example of P7s putting their hands up to say, “I don’t want my phone taken off me” and the idea that we should perhaps think about that. The journey of that discussion will enlighten young people: it will be about pedagogy and being with them when they learn something. The UNCRC is in place for a very good reason.
I will finish with a very short quote from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland:
“Children and young people are yet to feel change. For some children, if reform is not urgent, they will be denied their right to an education that develops them to their fullest potential for their entire school experience.”
15:49
Presiding Officer, I apologise that I had to leave the chamber briefly during the summing-up speeches.
I thank the Conservative Party for devoting some of its time this afternoon to wellbeing in Scotland’s schools, and to behaviour in particular. The breadth of the issues that are covered in the motion and the amendments, including the Government’s, means that we have not been able to fully do the topic justice this afternoon. However, in the coming weeks, subject to parliamentary agreement, there will be a full debate in Government time on the impact of poverty in our classrooms, and I look forward to that as another opportunity to speak to some of the issues in more detail. Nevertheless, today’s debate has been hugely important.
I will touch on a number of the points that members made in the debate, although I am conscious that time is short. Miles Briggs was absolutely right to say that our schools have changed post pandemic, and that change has partly informed the changed behaviours that we see in schools. I was pleased to hear that Miles Briggs attended his local EIS event last night. As we heard from Mr Rowley during the debate, I attended my event in Glenrothes last Thursday, where I listened to the views of mums and dads, carers and EIS members. They were very clear about the need for more resource, more staff and more investment. That is why the Government’s draft budget proposes an additional £41 million to support teacher numbers and £29 million for additional support needs as extra investment in our schools.
Miles Briggs spoke to there being no data on changed behaviour patterns post Covid. That somewhat negates the behaviour in Scottish schools research that was published in November 2023, which looks at data from nearly 4,000 staff across the country. There are also other data sets that he could consider, including the survey of more than 8,000 children that was carried out by HM Inspectorate of Education in Scotland, which looked at bullying in our schools.
I turn to Ms Duncan-Glancy’s points, a number of which were very relevant and pertinent to the issues that we are discussing today—in particular, reduced class contact. It may please the member to know that I met the teaching trade unions on that matter just yesterday. They have a requirement for the Government, working with local authorities, to table a suggestion to move forward on meaningful progress, which is part of the deal that we struck with local government ahead of the budget. That will be done in advance of the 3 February deadline that they have set. I very much welcome the trade unions’ engagement on that matter, because reducing class contact and teacher workload is part of the solution to some of the challenges that we have talked about today.
Ms Duncan-Glancy also spoke—rightly—to the worrying increase in misogyny in recent years. We see that borne out not only in the evidence from trade unions, but in our behaviour in Scottish schools research. I am grateful to the member for her suggestion in relation to the Mind Yer Time web resource. That is funded by the Scottish Government, with £170,000 of support going directly to the Scottish Youth Parliament, so I am glad that the member welcomes that investment from the Government.
Ross Greer, too, spoke about the experience of women and girls with regard to sex education, and he was right to raise consent as an issue. I accept that the update to the relationships, sexual health and parenthood guidance has taken too long, but I am glad that we will be able to publish it shortly, as I confirmed to Mr Greer only yesterday.
I agree with Mr Rennie’s comment that it is too early to judge whether the national action plan has had an influence. However, I put it on the record that, as I think the Government’s amendment makes clear, we will provide the Parliament with an update on the plan in March and set out the range of measures that have been taken forward.
Mr Rennie was also right to say that understanding cases individually should not necessarily negate consequences for adverse behaviour in our schools. I agree with him on that point. Over the past year, we have discussed consequences in our schools at length in the chamber. It is currently the case that young people will face consequences in their schools, but that depends on the behaviour management policy that exists. Mr Rennie spoke to the importance of school management, and I very much agree with him on the need to support staff with regard to how those behaviour management policies are taken forward. That is another reason why the national action plan is crucial, as it will drive more consistency across the country in how schools advocate for policies and enact the consequences that we have talked about today.
Bill Kidd spoke about the need to listen to pupils, and he was absolutely right on that point.
Various members expressed views about mobile phones. I am sure that all MSPs will be aware of the national guidance in that regard, which was published last August and was broadly welcomed. Mr Rennie was correct to say that, as education secretary, I do not have the power to enforce a national ban, but the national guidance goes as far as I am able to go in setting out our expectations and in empowering headteachers to implement a ban.
At this point, I note that not all headteachers in Scotland want a full ban. I encourage members to engage with and speak to their local headteachers. When I launched the guidance, I went to Stonelaw academy and spoke to the headteacher there about the process that they had undertaken. They got the young people to mine their data and look at the way in which they interacted with their phones—at their screen time, for example. They got buy-in from parents and from the community, but that approach took time. A ban is not a simple step, and we need to be mindful that there would be other consequences of having a national ban—
You need to conclude, cabinet secretary.
One member mentioned health needs, which we also address in the update to the national action plan on mobile phones.
I am very conscious of time. As I said to Parliament back in September on the subject of addressing post-pandemic challenges in our schools,
“there are unlikely to be quick, easy fixes”.—[Official Report, 3 September 2024; c 72.]
However, we all need to work together to that end, recognising that there must be a shared spirit of partnership.
I invite Douglas Ross to wind up the debate.
15:54
We have had an excellent debate. It was led by Miles Briggs, who covered a range of issues. His outlining of the concerns that he heard about from EIS members last night replicates what each and every one of us have heard from parents and staff up and down the country.
Just last month, I met two teaching assistants in Moray who explained that they love their jobs but they are facing hugely challenging and difficult circumstances in the classroom every day and they wonder about their future in the profession. That relates to the point that Willie Rennie made about support from management. One of the concerns that those teaching assistants came to speak to me about was their belief that their headteacher does not do enough to support them if a pupil needs to be removed from the classroom or needs more support. I am not saying that that is the case across the board, but there are some examples of headteachers who do not take the action that is needed to support their staff in the classroom.
That relates to Alex Rowley’s point that we need more support staff in our classrooms, but is it an attractive opportunity for people to come into our classrooms to do a difficult job if they will not get the support that they need? The two issues that Willie Rennie and Alex Rowley raised are important and they are linked to some of the problems that we are facing at the moment.
In what I thought was an excellent speech, Pam Gosal mentioned that a teacher suffers physical or verbal abuse every two minutes in the school day, and that is not the case only in the areas that have been mentioned today. In my area of Moray, we did a freedom of information request, and the figures on the increase in physical and verbal assaults on staff are shocking. In primary schools, the number of physical and verbal assaults has trebled in the past four years. In secondary schools, there were seven and a half times more physical and verbal assaults last year than there were four years previously. In 2020-21, there were just under 700 physical and verbal assaults in Moray primary schools. In 2023-24, the figure was almost 2,500. That huge increase raises questions about what is happening in our schools and about the guidance that the Scottish Government has put out. It is clear that the situation is not getting any better but is getting worse.
Of particular concern is the number of physical assaults using a weapon. In 2020-21, the figure for secondary schools in Moray was one. I strongly believe that that was one too many, but the figure went up to five and then six. In 2023-24, the number of physical assaults with a weapon that were recorded in Moray went into double figures—it was 11. We are talking about cases in which weapons have been taken into our schools and used against pupils, staff and others. We must get a grip on that.
That brings me to the Government’s response today. The minister was not very happy when she heard groans from Conservative members when she mentioned a task force. I am sorry, but that is the reaction. If the minister and the cabinet secretary think that, in staff rooms up and down the country, teachers will be celebrating and punching the air because the Government has announced another task force, they are completely wrong.
Will the member give way?
I will give way to the minister in a moment. I will give way if she can answer this question. She said that she has been instructed to announce the commencement of a task force. Does she or the education secretary know how many task forces, advisory groups and working groups are currently listed on the Scottish Government’s website?
I do not know whether the member and the rest of the Conservatives were listening to me. The task force is in relation to protecting children from online harm and abuse. It is not in relation to violence in schools. I advised Parliament that the cabinet secretary would speak about the actions for schools. The setting up of that task force is a really positive move. Anything that will help to protect our children and young people from online harms should be welcomed.
It is welcome, but the answer to my question is 302. That is the number of task forces, working groups and advisory groups that have been set up by the SNP Government, and that number is now to increase to 303. That is what the SNP reaches for every time there is a problem. It thinks that the problem can be solved by setting up another task force to listen more and do more, but it will not take action. In the debate, we heard the figures on the shocking rise in assaults on teachers and fellow pupils. The Government’s approach is not working. [Interruption.] I am not sure what the minister’s hand gestures mean, but the issue is not being dealt with properly. We are not getting to the core of the problem, and another task force is not going to do it.
We have not had much time in this debate, as has been mentioned. I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary will hold a debate on the subject in Government time, but we have asked for that before now. Yet again, we are having a Conservative-led Opposition day debate in which we are raising education issues. However, we will listen and we will contribute to the debate that the cabinet secretary holds, because the issue of a safe school environment is hugely important to people up and down the country. I thought that the seats behind the cabinet secretary would be fuller, given how crucial that subject is.
Miles Briggs’s motion is so wide ranging because there are so many issues that we need to focus on in our education system. We were told that education would be the SNP Government’s number 1 priority, but I have never seen evidence of that. Not once in the SNP’s 18 years in government has education truly been the number 1 priority, and that is why our young people are suffering and why our teachers and support staff are struggling as well.
I want to give the final word to Roz McCall, who gave an excellent speech. She finished by saying that it is crucial that we “let children be children”. As a parent and a politician, I could not agree more. By supporting commonsense Scottish Conservative policies, we can improve the opportunities for our children, let them be children and give them the chance to thrive in Scotland, as we would all like them to.
That concludes the debate. There will be a very short pause before we move on to the next item of business.
Air ais
Portfolio Question TimeAir adhart
Electricity Infrastructure Consenting