Seòmar agus comataidhean

I agree, but as it stands the bill says that qualifications Scotland will decide who to engage in the development of the charters.

I want to pick up on the point about the bill making provision for BSL and inclusive communication. Could it be strengthened in that sense?

Thank you, convener. Good morning to the panel members. There have been suggestions throughout the process for this bill that the culture of the SQA needs to be improved when the new body takes over, so can the panel members say what they believe was or is wrong with the culture in the SQA and what good corporate culture would look like instead?

I can, thank you convener. Good morning to the witnesses and thank you to you all. I want to say up front that I acknowledge how difficult this morning’s conversation is, so I thank you for coming. I really appreciate it and I am sure that other members do, too. The staff voice in this is crucial.

We have touched on the point about leadership, but I want to go a step further. I asked the Scottish Government in a written question

“whether there should be reserved space on the new board of Qualifications Scotland for trade union representation in addition to staff representation.”

The Government said that its position was as stated in the bill and that the board would

“consist of one or more members who have knowledge of the interests of the staff of Qualifications Scotland”.—[Written Answers, 14 August 2024; S6W-28803.]

Pauline Rodger and Sharon McGuigan, how well do you think that the current arrangements, in which a staff representative is on the board of the SQA, ensure that the voice of the staff body is heard? What are your views of the proposed arrangements as set out in the Government’s response to my question?

What is preventing that?

Do the witnesses think that what is proposed is enough to stop something like 2020 happening again?

I put on record my apologies to the convener, other committee members and the panel for my slightly late arrival this morning. I was stuck in traffic. I am really sorry for any disruption that that might have caused.

On the point about confidence, I want to share a few aspects of the evidence that we received, which I am sure you will have read. After that, my question will be for Fiona Robertson.

In its submission, the EIS said:

“The actions of the SQA have inflicted significant damage upon its relationship with the profession, which now largely views the organisation with cynicism and suspicion.”

The Scottish Secondary Teachers Association has said that the SQA is “adrift” from teachers, and School Leaders Scotland has said:

“We ... question why the Chair of the SQA will automatically become the Chair of Qualifications Scotland”,

because

“those involved cannot transfer lock-stock and barrel to the new body”.

Given that, and given what you have just said, do you accept that public and teacher confidence in the organisation is not what it should be?

I think that that lack of trust applies to the general appeals system as well.

When she was asked about culture earlier this morning, Fiona Robertson mentioned that the bill creates scaffolding to make the change. Do the witnesses believe that the bill will bring the types of improvements in relation to cultural and behavioural change that are expected through the scaffolding that has been described?

Have the witnesses seen any indication of a change in approach from the SQA in recent months and the past year?