Chamber and committees

I thank everyone for their evidence so far. I am looking for a bit more precision, because I am not an educationist but I am involved in the policy-making process. I get completely what Professor Ainscow is saying about empowering people who know what they are doing to do what they know best. What I do not understand is what we are getting wrong, and I need a bit more precision on that.

You talked about budget control. What elements of central budget control do you disapprove of and would change? What would you change in terms of the measurement process? I have seen the view in your paper that measurement is narrowing education, which has a disproportionate effect on disadvantaged pupils. What are we getting wrong on that front, and what are we getting wrong on guidance? I know that you will say that it is a partnership and that we have a role, but I want to know what we are not getting right and what we need to change.

Professor Ainscow, can I stop you there? I know that we have positive things, but I am in politics to fix things that are not going well. Therefore, can you tell us what is not going well and what we are getting wrong? I am quite prepared for you to be personal. I need to know what we are getting wrong and so far we have not had precision.

Okay. Let me give you some precise questions. I have been a strong critic of Scottish national standardised assessments. I think that they create league tables and distort learning in schools, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has made it very clear that they need to change. Are those the type of measurements that you think are narrowing the curriculum and disproportionately affecting disadvantaged pupils? Would you change SNSAs? Would you, for instance, get rid of them for primary 1 pupils?

Okay.

I get all that completely. Let me give you another example. Some of the controls that we have set from the centre include the pupil equity fund and the attainment challenge. We have, in effect, ring fenced the money for those things. There has also been a more recent one around teacher recruitment—permanent posts, in particular. Would you get rid of those controls from the centre? Is that the kind of budget control that you want teachers to have more freedom over?

That is quite a radical change.

I have a final question, which is for Becky Francis. We have talked about tutoring. From my understanding, there is a significant difference between the ways of working of the pupil equity fund and of the English pupil premium. Is the lack of encouragement from the PEF part of the reason why we are not expanding the tutoring programme?

You are saying that we do not fully understand the impact of the pandemic on those key groups.

Okay, if you—

It was helpful to have a response from the cabinet secretary. However, it begs further questions about the initial legislation and regulations. There are still many unanswered questions and we should continue to monitor the situation, but I am satisfied that we can proceed.

Not at all, convener—I have found the discussion fascinating.

What is coming through very clearly is that the bigger threat, which has been present for a long time now, is this particular use of alcohol and plying victims with it in order to gain control. Is there a danger that with all the recent publicity there has been an unfair—or, I should say, incorrect—focus on drug spiking with needles or in drinks, when all we want is for people to be alert to traditional drink spiking through extra alcohol, triple shots and so on?

My second question is probably for our student witnesses, Victim Support Scotland and others. Are the pubs and venues meeting the standard that Mike Grieve has set out with regard to what you expect from staff in dealing with these incidents? If not, how do we change that situation?

Kate, do you want to go first, given that you were the first to talk about triple shots of alcohol?