Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you very much for all the evidence—it has been very helpful. I have two quick questions. The first is for Janie McManus. What new approaches to the work of the inspectors are being considered?

Thank you.

I understand, and your comments have been very helpful.

On the back of that, when we were discussing the proposed advisory council, someone talked about the representation of teachers and, indeed, who will be represented on that advisory council. Will that not help shape the approach that is taken to inspections? What is your view on how the council should be set up and how it should operate once established? That is, if it should be established—you might not think so.

Thank you for all the guidance that has come to us so far. My committee colleague chums have pretty much asked this question already, but if there is anything that you want to add, that would be fine. Are there any powers that the chief inspector should have that have not been included in the bill?

That gives us a major push in a direction that is not necessarily always understood.

Earlier, in passing, you alluded to what has happened down in England, with the terrible circumstances relating to one headteacher. Does the bill need to say that, although, naturally, inspectors can decide on the direction that they take, there are basics that everyone must deliver?

I think that Mark Priestley was looking agitated there for a moment.

On the back of what has been said, the bill sets out principles and directions for inspections in relation to the quality of education provision, the assistance that is required in schools and so on. How deeply should those principles be set? Should future chief inspectors have a degree of decision-making power in that regard?

Thank you. That is really helpful.

It is quite early days, in some ways, for some of the elements that are going into the bill, but they are quite wide powers and policy development has a long way to go yet. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that the legislation is clear, and how are you allowing for proper parliamentary scrutiny of the bill?

Okay. I hope that you do not mind a wee bit of specificity on how that will affect some people. Scottish Land & Estates stated in its correspondence with the committee that

“These powers create unnecessary uncertainty that would have a detrimental impact on land markets”

and that

“Making law but reserving the right to change it at any time is unsettling for businesses and unhelpful when businesses want to plan for the long term.”

Do you have a response to that view? Do you accept that the lack of specificity in the bill leaves unclear the future operation of the law to those who will be affected by it?