Seòmar agus comataidhean

That model will not work for many businesses, will it?

Willie Rennie touched on the original principles that Withers outlined. Two of the requirements he called for are

“Clear consistent opportunities for employer engagement and leadership”

and

“Businesses that are active partners in workforce development”.

What is there in the bill to advance those principles for your businesses and for those that you represent and to improve the supply of and demand for apprenticeship availability? I am not just asking about the finance element of that. How will it increase apprenticeships to the level we all want to see, which is closer to 40,000, rather than the 25,000 apprenticeships that were delivered?

That is very helpful. Why do you think that the Government decided to choose that definition? My reading of it is that if people are in paid apprenticeships, I would hope that there is a pathway into employment, but the definition will very much narrow the opportunity down.

A few people have touched on equipment. We might not have the time in this session to get on to this, but it is quite important to say that sometimes private partnerships have state-of-the-art equipment, but employers who I have had conversations with tell me that they are receiving people who are trained on older equipment. Responding to what the economy needs is important. Net zero seems to be in a better place now in terms of the equipment that people are being trained on, but that is not so much the case on other courses. This part of the bill needs to look at that. It is an interesting time. I am happy to hand back, convener.

I take on board those points. The amendments would expand the new inspectorate regime to include what people want, which should be welcome. We know that there are on-going issues with the school estate, with RAAC being one of those issues. It is welcome that the vast majority of schools have now, I think, corrected that, but parents will want to be confident that there is an on-going inspection regime and that the certificates, which are sometimes provided by private companies, will not be lost, because they will be asked for when an inspection takes place.

I take the member’s point, and given my colleague Stephen Kerr’s point about when inspections take place, there might be a different or better framework for making that documentation available from local authorities. I understand that, and I am sure that Liz Smith will be open to discussing and developing that further.

As with Liz Smith’s amendments, amendments 165 and 209 in my name are probing amendments to consider the opportunity to explore how we can improve child protection and safeguarding in educational establishments. Given what the cabinet secretary has said, I do not intend to move them.

I appreciate what the cabinet secretary has said and look forward to hearing about those conversations.

I put on record my hope that the petition will be heard—we will see how the Government responds to it. More importantly, some timescale for that is needed because, given the pace at which the Government wants the bill to be voted on and passed, the petition will not be part of that process. The petition has been sitting unaddressed for the duration of this parliamentary session, but I hope that it is progressed before the election so that a new organisation can be created or further inspection changes can take place.

I will not press amendment 157 or move my other amendments in the group.

Amendment 157, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendments 306 and 307 not moved.

I appreciate what the cabinet secretary has said and look forward to hearing about those conversations.

I put on record my hope that the petition will be heard—we will see how the Government responds to it. More importantly, some timescale for that is needed because, given the pace at which the Government wants the bill to be voted on and passed, the petition will not be part of that process. The petition has been sitting unaddressed for the duration of this parliamentary session, but I hope that it is progressed before the election so that a new organisation can be created or further inspection changes can take place.

I will not press amendment 157 or move my other amendments in the group.

Amendment 157, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendments 306 and 307 not moved.

I think that the cabinet secretary has met with Beth Morrison about her Calum’s law campaign. I do not know whether Daniel Johnson’s bill will time out in the current parliamentary session, but it seeks to improve data collection, the recording of incidents and the training of individuals. It does not look as though that is captured in amendment 88, so perhaps the cabinet secretary would look to lodge an amendment at stage 3 to include that.

I fully respect the point that the petition that I have mentioned is still live, but will the potential discussions that the cabinet secretary has referred to include the establishment of what the petitioners have been seeking—that is, an independent national whistleblowing officer not just for education but for wider children’s services in Scotland? That is currently missing, and I point out that we have moved to provide such a function for health services, for example. Is that something that the Government would consider?

The responses to our call for views highlighted concerns around a lack of representation of employers in industry. Have you read those responses? What is your take on how you would ensure that that works?