Seòmar agus comataidhean

[Inaudible.]—the cuts from SAC?

I found that really useful.

I have a question for Mr Lyons. For a long time, Glasgow was one of the most deprived communities in Scotland. Does the shift away from an analysis of multiple deprivation and extreme poverty to something that is more general across the country worry the local authority and you personally?

This subject comes up weekly in our committee meetings, and it came up again today in the evidence that we received regarding the attainment challenge. Additional support needs are an underlying issue in the performance of the education system across Scotland and pertain to some of the most vulnerable young people.

Given how often the issue comes up, it would be good if it were firmly on our work programme for the foreseeable future. Given the representations that I receive as a member, I think that it should come to the fore in our work programme, if we can find space for it. I recognise that our work programme is busy and that we would have to find space, but it is a recurring theme that comes up week after week.

All the evidence that we receive shows that it is a challenge for local authorities and families. I am keen, therefore, that we try to find space for it. I recognise that that might not happen in the coming weeks, but let us take suggestions on how we deal with it. I am very keen for us to do something about it.

I am content with that, convener. It sounds like a reasonable approach. The committee is pretty clear.

I will come in partly to give the deputy convener reassurance that I am not confused in the picture that I have in mind about the evidence that we have received. Additional support needs issues have come up in the context of Covid and in a variety of other contexts, including the institutional reviews that we are considering and in the evidence about Education Scotland. Those issues came up again in today’s evidence. As the convener has rightly said, it is the silver thread that runs through much of the evidence that we have taken over the past year. Those issues are not particular to Covid, although Covid has had a clear impact on young people with additional support needs.

That brings me to my point. I see the issue in a broader context. We must consider how the funding is allocated, which is part of the question. Has the Morgan review been implemented appropriately, and are we meeting the aspirations that were set out in it? A broader inquiry into that would be appropriate—I hear that all the time and there is a real need for it.

With that redirection from parts of the country where there is huge deprivation and significant challenges to those young people who are in poverty, is it not the case that those kids in some of the poorest communities are paying the price of helping the kids who are in rural poverty? Is it right that we should have that trade-off, one for the other?

Let us face it—for some of those children, it is.

I have one last question, which is for Mr McDaid—I do not want to leave you out. You may have followed some of the recent evidence from colleagues in trade unions, who described the shift in the funding formula as “immoral”. They were aghast about that shift, which, in their view, is totally unacceptable.

South Lanarkshire Council’s funding has gone up by 8 per cent. How would you cope with a 79 per cent cut? A former headteacher from Dundee told us that they did not know how they would cope. Would you be able to cope with that?

Okay.

Mark Ratter, you are on the other side: your increase is a fairly significant one. You come from a reasonably small authority with a reasonably small increase of about £2 million, but that is up by about 43 per cent. How will you allocate that money to specifically target young people living in poverty?

The Government had a clear direction of travel in its intent to respond. It would be reasonable to write to ask what progress it has made on that. We would understand the delays, but, if it is going to make a response, it would be good to see it.