Seòmar agus comataidhean

Over the past four years, you must have been looking to see what the increase of the workload would be.

We have had different evidence on that, then. The minister said that it is not mandatory for local authority elected members to be PVG checked as part of the scheme, but you are saying that it is. Can we get clarity on that?

Minister, is there anything that you wish to add in response to the issues raised by members?

So, there were no issues at all with the IT system. Is it acceptable and the norm for the Government to take more than four years to set up an IT system? Is that what you are saying?

The bill would provide exactly that consistency, would it not? At the moment, some local authorities use outdoor education and others do not. The member’s bill would provide the consistency that you are looking for.

I could understand that if the Government was against the bill. If the Government was in favour of it, there would be no requirement to even ask the question. If you are genuinely neutral, why would you not submit the financial resolution? Why would you not have had discussions about that?

That is all that it will be: a reflection on the discussion that we have had.

Yes, please.

On that point from Matthew Sweeney, if legislating for the provision of residential outdoor education is not the solution, nothing else is coming forward. You are saying that such provision is not the top priority because it might not be the single measure that could improve attainment, but could that money go to anything else that would improve attainment?

Your member councils may take different approaches to the bill. Different approaches may be taken within councils, too, given that we have geographically large authorities such as Highland Council, for example, where different approaches may be taken in the north of the region and the south of the region.