Seòmar agus comataidhean

Very much so. Over the years, I have visited most outdoor education centres across Scotland and many of the other facilities that offer outdoor education, and the professionalism is second to none. People must realise that outdoor education is evolving. It is not just about people climbing Munros, canoeing or rock climbing, which has perhaps been its image. Given their professional development, many of the people who deliver outdoor education are trying to embrace the spirit of the getting it right for every child policy—that is, we have to get it right for every child, whatever their needs are, in outdoor settings.

They have done a huge amount not only to modernise the delivery of what they are offering but to try to articulate it with the modern curriculum, which I think is very important. The Government quite rightly asked how the proposals in the bill would articulate with the curriculum for excellence, and I think that they complement it 100 per cent. The principles behind the curriculum for excellence are exactly the principles that are behind the outdoor education sector.

I come back to Professor Greg Mannion’s point when he gave evidence to the committee. He said:

“We should make it an entitlement in the curriculum that everybody gets education in outdoor settings, and within that we should make it a further entitlement that people get a residential experience.”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 6 November 2024; c 25.]

I could not agree more.

I am impressed by what I see, but I also do not want us to get into a situation where we force all young people into outdoor residential education. That is not the intention behind the bill. All I want to see is that the opportunities are there for every child, should their school wish to take them up.

I hope that that does not happen. I say again that the Government has been very engaged. I have been very pleased with the constructive discussions that I have had with the cabinet secretary and the minister. There is a genuine agreement that the principles of the bill are the right ones.

I do not see how anybody could argue that the principles would not articulate with what we are trying to do in Scottish education. They articulate with the curriculum for excellence and with the Scottish Government’s approach to learning for sustainability. There is a firm commitment. Does the approach have to be statutory? I come back to my earlier answer, which is that we have tried the non-statutory route, some of which has worked and some of which is not working. To ensure inclusion and equity, we perhaps need to take the statutory route.

The evidence has been comprehensive and it has largely been very positive. I give the committee credit for the number of evidence sessions that you held and for taking the trouble to meet many of the people who are involved in delivering outdoor education. I think that you also went on a visit at the beginning of this week.

Issues have—rightly—been raised, and it is imperative that, should the general principles of the bill be agreed to at stage 1, I address them, whether they are about costs, catering for youngsters who have additional support needs or teachers’ time and the commitment that they might be required to make. Those are all valid issues and I discussed many of them when I appeared before the Finance and Public Administration Committee.

Overall, what has struck me the most—I return to what young people and those in the sector have said—is that residential outdoor education provides life-changing experiences. In many cases, I have seen a young person who would not otherwise have had such opportunities come back from an outdoor residential centre a changed person. That is hugely valuable in today’s society.

I have been very impressed by the evidence. I very much welcome the Government’s engagement on the bill—it has done so for quite some time—and I hope to be able to work with it should the bill pass stage 1.

For me, the case for residentials involves what the Outward Bound Trust said, which is that, if you put £1 into residentials, you get benefits worth somewhere between £5 and £15. That was based on evidence from the United Kingdom and other countries. A very extensive survey was done, and I think that those findings are pretty compelling.

How do you measure all the outcomes of outdoor learning? Some of them—whether they concern nursery provision or what happens in schools—are valuable, but how do you measure all that? It is pretty difficult, but we have to try, and I think that what we have seen when looking into all the evidence suggests that the return from residentials is very high.

The trust model is overseen by the Scottish Government and, under that model, the trustees all have expertise—in this case, that would be in outdoor education and in the business models that are required for sustainability.

As I said, public trusts elsewhere work pretty well. I come back to the fact that we need to ensure that Government, private sector and third sector involvement—as Mr Briggs mentioned—can all come together, because I think that the ambitions of all three of those groups are the same.

There are various trusts around Scotland that have done quite a lot, whether it be the Robertson Trust or the Gannochy Trust in my part of the world. A variety of funding streams are out there. PEF is one of them and philanthropic and charitable provision is another, but there are also the models that I gave evidence on to the Finance and Public Administration Committee, and I sent a letter to this committee about what has happened in Ireland with Rethink Ireland.

I am convinced that, if we are creative and imaginative enough and if there is a will, which I believe there is on the side of the Scottish Government as well as on the side of the committee and myself, we can make this work. You are quite right, Mr Briggs, that there is definitely scope to look at different funding models, and Mr Mason made a good point about some of the possibilities. Should the bill pass stage 1, the issue will be instrumental at stage 2 in ensuring that the bill works.

Some local authorities and some centres have been successful in attracting a lot of money. For example, the Outward Bound Trust is a charitable trust that has a lot of money behind it. It is exceptionally well run and has delivered wonderful outdoor education for a long time. I am impressed by its can-do approach to everything.

The approach has to be sustainable, as I said when I gave evidence to the Finance and Public Administration Committee.

There are examples across Scotland of other private sector involvement in Government policy. I think that I am right in saying that HMP Addiewell, which is a private sector facility, provides a service to the Scottish Prison Service. In days gone by, we have had lots of private finance initiative commitments in which private sector money was marshalled in by the Government in partnership.

This is an interesting aspect of public finances at the moment, and it is certainly very much on the Finance and Public Administration Committee’s agenda. Scotland needs there to be a good relationship between the public and private sectors, as there is in many other countries. There is scope for ensuring that we address the question that you just asked about the importance of ensuring that the private and public sectors can work together.

Those are good questions, which have been raised by several witnesses. On provision, although a number of local authority centres, particularly outdoor education centres, have closed, the beds capacity is quite impressive. You heard from the outdoor education sector about some of the expansion that has happened—for example, we have a new centre in Aberdeenshire. From that angle, there is an expanded provision of bedspace.

SEEMiS is a system that has been used to ensure good-quality tracking of young people. There is no doubt that some outdoor education centres need an update—some of the people from the sector squarely admitted that. Those centres are looking for a regular commitment to young people’s participation, so that they know that there is a regular income.

One of the interesting things—this goes back to the question that Jackie Dunbar asked me—is that the number of pupils who are going away outwith the normal period, which tends to be spring or summer, is increasing. That is a positive reflection on what the sector has done to make itself more attractive to a wider range of pupils and by offering more diverse activities.

You made an interesting suggestion along those lines when I was giving evidence to the Finance and Public Administration Committee. There is merit in having a look at that opportunity. That is part of providing diversity through the additional funding that would be required. I would be happy to engage with the Scottish Government if that was where it felt that we should go.

That is a very important question. Yes, there has to be flexibility. Let us be honest—the curriculum in Scotland is flexible. I think that, in principle, the Scottish system benefits a lot from that flexibility, when compared with other systems, such as the one in a country not too far away from here, which has a much more rigorous curriculum and has run into difficulty as a result. Flexibility is important.

Local authorities and local schools will take different perspectives on what kind of education they want to facilitate. The purpose of residential outdoor education need not be to provide outdoor activities; it might be to provide outdoor learning as part of a language trip or a history trip. Such educational experiences are just as valuable as any others. That flexibility is absolutely vital.

I come back to the fact that the evidence proves that residential outdoor education benefits youngsters from the point of view of attainment, behaviour, confidence and the ability to have good relationships with not only their peers but their staff. That evidence is compelling. However, that does not take away from the flexibility angle—in fact, it enhances the flexibility angle. We talk about doing our best for every child; the ability for each child to have a different residential experience is very important.

Pam Duncan-Glancy has given some good evidence to the Parliament on additional support for learning. Last week, we saw what we still have to do to enhance the provision of additional support for learning. The evidence that has been provided by residential outdoor centres such as the one at Ardroy—some centres are now concentrating on such provision—is very compelling.

You were right to ask that question, because flexibility is an important principle.