Seòmar agus comataidhean

It comes from the decisions that we have taken on savings and analysing the money that we have for 2022-23 to ensure that we can—

Well, indeed, and every single time, Mr Kerr, you demand that I put a new offer on the table—

I will say a couple of things about that.

Overall, local authorities spend £6.4 billion on education. I note that figure to give some balance to some of the numbers that you have mentioned.

I have a funny feeling that, if we, as a Government, did not come in and do something that would protect teacher numbers, Opposition parties would be jumping up and down—indeed, they were at First Minister’s question time—

Mr Marra, you should let me answer the question.

For brevity, I will restate something that I said earlier. I have seen no research to suggest that cutting teacher numbers, or the number of learning hours that children spend in school, would improve attainment. There is an obligation on Government to do all that we can to try to ensure that numbers are maintained if not improved.

First, I would point out that, in 2022-23, the money was given with the understanding that it would be used for teacher numbers and pupil support staff, and that was our expectation as we went through the year. We have received and continue to receive reassurances from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that it was spent on education and issues surrounding education—particularly teacher numbers. However, if Mr Dey would like to pass on a copy of that letter from Angus Council to let me see the details, I would be happy to respond, because clearly the situation will vary from council to council. However, the overall reassurance from COSLA that the money was spent on education is something that we had to take on good faith.

Clearly, when the teacher census numbers came out, there was concern that that might not have been the case in every situation. That is why, looking forward, we are very keen to ensure that we have further monitoring in place to ensure that we get from that money what we expect, which is to at least maintain teacher and pupil support staff numbers over the year ahead. I would be happy to receive that letter and to look into it in further detail, if Mr Dey wishes to pass that on.

The overall number of teachers went down by 92 and it varies by local authority. In fairness to local authority colleagues, I would also say that some of the numbers go down by very small amounts and some of that might be due to genuine recruitment and retention issues, particularly in rural remote areas or in specific subjects. Therefore, there is a real need for us to look very carefully at this and to work with local authorities and councils as we go through the process to ensure that we are cognisant of some of the challenges that they might face in particular areas or particular subjects that might lead to numbers going down by quite a small number. That might not be due to strategic decisions made by the council but due to genuine recruitment challenges. I would separate out those two issues.

Some of the reductions were small and some of them might have been due to those practical issues, but that is clearly still a concern. We also had to bear in mind that some of the proposals—I accept that they were proposals from officers, not decisions that were made by councils—were really quite grave in terms of what they would have meant for teacher and pupil support staff numbers. It was on that basis—not just looking at the teacher census for last year, which showed that small decrease—that I was keen to take action. Therefore, it was a case of looking at the situation historically—looking at the previous year—but also at some of the proposals from officers for the year ahead.

As soon as the teacher census numbers came out, I was concerned about them and quickly wrote to COSLA to raise those concerns and to suggest that we meet urgently to discuss the numbers. We then moved forward with discussions with COSLA on those issues.

Private discussions took place with COSLA, but they were not on finding a way of coming forward in the way that we have with the proposals that we have now; they were on finding good will and an understanding that teacher numbers would not be cut. However, when it became clear to me that, unfortunately, further action would have to be taken, we changed from the policy that we had in 2022-23, which was based on an understanding of how that money would be spent, to what will happen in 2023-24, which is to ensure that the money is spent in that way and to initiate clawback if ministers so decide. There was an on-going private discussion with COSLA, as I hope people will appreciate we should have, all the way from the publication of the teacher census in December 2022 to the letter that was then sent through officially on how that would be done.

Yes, we do have that. I would be happy to provide some information about how the money has been spent. There was a clear increase in the number of teachers. If we look at 2021, we had 54,285—I mentioned the reduction of 92 teachers in that regard—but, in the previous year, we had 53,400 teachers. Overall, we have seen an increase, from pre-pandemic levels to where we are now, of an additional 2,000 teachers.

On how the money was given to councils—this was Covid money, so it was before the baseline—there were two parts to that. We saw an increase in the number of teachers in employment, particularly from that first batch of Covid money. It is quite challenging to know whether the second batch was spent to improve the number of teachers and pupil support assistants, as we might have thought that it would be; it was Covid money, and there are a number of ways in which that could have been spent. Again, I would say to councils that there was more flexibility for them at that point. I would be happy to provide the information about the breakdown over the years and a breakdown of our expectations about where that money would be spent.

A great deal of work is being done to model what happens with the teacher workforce. The Scottish Government does not undertake that work alone; a lot of it is done with stakeholders. The model that is used looks at, for example, the number that has to go into initial teacher education to maintain pupil-teacher ratios, the number of teachers who are in the system, retirements, the number of people who are returning from maternity leave and so on.

There is then a group that looks at that modelling but, as I said, it is not just the Government. It involves the universities, the funding councils, the General Teaching Council for Scotland and, importantly, the teachers union and the local authorities as the employers—I should not forget to mention them. A number of stakeholders are looking at the best modelling and forecasting that can be done on the numbers of teachers who will leave the workforce and who might have to come into it. Such groups will also analyse what has to be done to assist the Government with its proposals, which are supported by the Bute house agreement, for additional teachers.