Chamber and committees

Scenario 2 of the Scottish Qualifications Authority’s plan indicates that

“revision support, for example guidance on topics, will be provided to help learners maximise their exam performance and reduce exam stress.”

Do we know yet what the content of the revision support will be? I ask that Greg Dempster and then Douglas Hutchison answer that.

I might have to, because it is clear that the cabinet secretary will not make any efforts to argue for more funding for core school budgets. It is your job to stand up for education, but you are not making that case. Why on earth are you sitting here today complacently accepting the fact that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy is, in effect, cutting £100 million from your core budget? That is undermining the work that you are doing. Why are you not making that case?

I am quite surprised by the cabinet secretary’s evidence. I do not think that she has given any acknowledgement to the fact that core school budgets will be cut by £100 million in this year’s settlement. Why is she not spitting mad about that? Surely, it is her responsibility to stand up for school budgets.

It is quite simple. The real-terms cut to councils is £268 million. Education is about half of what councils do, so I am being quite cautious in saying that the cut is around £100 million. There is no reference to or acknowledgement of that. Why are you not spitting mad about that? Surely, you should not be defending that cut to the core school budget; you should be arguing for an increase to it.

We heard from Michael Marra, who made some pretty clear points about the challenges—which you acknowledged—that pupils and teachers are facing in schools, yet you have imposed a cut of £100 million to their budget.

The figures are from the Scottish Parliament information centre. If you dig into your briefing, I am sure that you will discover that there is a £268 million cut. Councillors across the board, including Scottish National Party councillors, are spitting mad about the local authority settlement, so I cannot understand why you are not, given that education is a massive part of what local authorities do. Why are you not angry?

There has been a £100 million cut. Do you have no issues with that at all?

With respect, your answer was rubbish, because the Scottish Parliament information centre has made it clear that there is a £268 million cut to local authority budgets, and half of local authorities’ spending is on education. You have made various promises to fund extra teachers and other things, and you should, of course, fund those, because those were your election promises, but that does not entitle you to cut £100 million from core school budgets.

This is not about England; it is about Scotland. I do not want to hear comparisons with elsewhere, because I care about pupils in Scotland. Cabinet secretary, why on earth are you not angry about the cut? I am angry. I cannot believe that the Government is cutting budgets at this time, so why are you not angry about it? That is what I do not understand. What you have said is very managerial.

The cabinet secretary has followed the script this morning. Teachers, councillors, pupils and parents will listen to the cabinet secretary’s answers and will draw one conclusion, which is that she is not standing up for Scottish education and making the case for it. There would not be a £100 million cut to core school budgets if she was making the case.

I have finished my questions.

I know that some companies that pay the levy now do less training than they did before. That cannot be right.

They are just doing less training. They are not companies that would naturally take on apprentices and now, with the way that the funds are set up, they are doing less training than they were before. How could that ever be credible?