Seòmar agus comataidhean

There are a range of approaches in place which support the prevention of harm to vulnerable young people by those who work with them.

If an organisation has employees or volunteers doing a regulated role, it has a legal duty to report harmful behaviour to Disclosure Scotland. This duty applies whether the person is a member of the PVG scheme or not.

There are also a range or regulatory organisations whose function are to maintain professional standards. For example, the General Teaching Council for Scotland.

We are committed to tackling the underlying issues which influence ideologies and seek to protect the rights of all young people. For example, in schools we have undertaken work, aligned to the implementation of the Equality Act to prevent discrimination; through challenging racism, misogyny, and bullying and through approaches such as LGBT Inclusive Education and Supporting Transgender Young people in Schools Guidance which makes clear the responsibility of schools to support young people who are considering or who have changed their gender identity in order to ensure that they do not experience discrimination within schools and can reach their full potential.

In December 2022, local authorities reported that around 280,000 devices had been distributed to learners. This figure contains the 72,000 Scottish Government funded device from the pandemic alongside those purchased through local investment. We do not hold an updated figure but would expect this to be significantly higher, given the ongoing investment from local authorities since this time.

Local authorities are responsible for the management of their own digital assets and will have processes and financing in place to deal with the repair or replacement of devices as required. We do not hold this information centrally.

Decisions in relation to Exceptional Circumstances and Appeals services for the National Qualifications are an operational matter for the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA).

Figures quoted in a recent media article related to SQA’s Exam Exceptional Circumstances Consideration Service (EECCS). SQA is the only awarding body in the UK that offers an exceptional circumstances service which specifically reviews alternative evidence. It has been designed to offer young people the best opportunity to demonstrate evidence of attainment if their examination experience is impacted by, for example, bereavement, illness or other personal circumstances. This is a pre-certification process, with requests being submitted within 10 working days after the relevant exam. This means that if a young person experiences bereavement or other personal circumstance ahead of an exam, they can ask for alternative evidence to be taken into account when their grade is being determined – whether or not they are able to attend the exam.

The SQA Appeals service is a separate process that takes place following certification for learners who consider they have not achieved their expected results, and involves a marking review of SQA-marked assessments. Candidates who have undergone exceptional circumstances consideration are excluded from the Appeals Service for the same qualification. This is because the EECCS includes a marking review of any/all submitted external assessments that are related to the request.

SQA provided figures in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request from The Herald newspaper on the number of EECCS requests made and cancelled. SQA do not categorise EECCS requests as successful or rejected. It is incorrect to interpret the data as showing that the SQA did not approve over 90% of exam appeals made on the grounds of bereavement.

While SQA may cancel an EECCS request in some circumstances (where, for example, estimates had not been provided, coursework not completed, or a lack of supporting evidence), a larger number of requests are cancelled by the candidate’s centre (school, college or training provider).

For personal circumstances, such as bereavement, the type of EECCS request submitted is determined by the Head of Centre. SQA do not assess the reason for the request or require access to further details regarding the submission. A centre may cancel an EECCS request if they later determine that either there is not a justification for the request, or the alternative evidence available is not sufficient.

To maintain impartiality and fairness, examiners are not provided with any information about the nature of an EECCS request. This is an important safeguard that has been built into the EECCS to ensure that all candidates are treated equally and receive grades based on evidence-based demonstrated attainment against the national standard.

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-37627 on 27 May 2025. All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers

I refer the member to the answer to question S6W-37627 on 27 May 2025.

The following table sets out any representations that officials have identified as being received by the Scottish Government referencing bereavement-based exceptional circumstances or appeals arrangements in relation to the National Qualifications.

It should be borne in mind that different exceptional circumstances and appeals arrangements were in place in 2020, 2021 and 2022 as a result of the alternative awarding processes in place due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Implementation of the reduction of class contact time requires agreement through the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers (SNCT).

The Scottish Government remains committed to reducing class contact time, and we will continue to work with COSLA and the teacher unions, through the SNCT to agree our approach to delivering this important commitment at pace.

Four organisations submitted a tender to host the Anti-Racism Observatory for Scotland:

1.Edinburgh Innovations Ltd and University of Edinburgh

2.Impact Funding Partners

3.University Court University of Glasgow

4.University of Strathclyde

The bids were evaluated in line with standard procurement processes.

The bid received from the University of Strathclyde, in partnership with the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights, outlined that the Observatory would be hosted at the University of Strathclyde.

Ministerial pay is set and administered by the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government has no role in this. You may, therefore, wish to direct any detailed questions on pay to the Scottish Parliament. A breakdown on Ministerial salaries is provided on the Scottish parliament website - MSP salaries | Scottish Parliament Website.

I can confirm that all Ministers accepted the equalisation of the MSP element of their salary, with the exception of the First Minister who chose not to do so to avoid any perception that he was personally benefiting from his own decisions on Ministerial pay.

The Scottish Government has already published the estimated financial contribution made to public spending by the voluntary Ministerial pay freeze since it was established on 1 April 2009. Between 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2025, Ministers made an estimated £2.2 million available for public spending from their own pay packets. This is public funding that would not have been available had Ministers not voluntarily decided to return a proportion of their pay. In 2024-25, Ministerial pay was 30.4% below where it would otherwise have been. From 1 April 2025, the MSP element of the pay of all Ministers except the First Minister was equalised with that of all other MSPs, while the freeze on the Ministerial element of their pay continues for a seventeenth consecutive year. In 2025-26, Ministers will make an estimated £166,000 available for public spending from their own pay packets and, as such, public funds this year will again be higher than they would have been without the pay freeze. This is the point that the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport was making.