Chamber and committees

Do you have an approximate figure? In recent days, I have heard the figure of between 38,000 and 40,000 quoted in media sources.

As a society, we need to be more comfortable with different positive destinations. I go back to the earlier discussion around the number of university places, which has been part of the public discourse in the past few days. If more young people go into apprenticeships or directly into the workplace because that is the right route to enable them to flourish, we need to be comfortable with the fact that that may have an impact on the numbers of young people who go to university. That is not necessarily a negative thing.

We are at the beginning—well, we are not at the beginning; the situation has developed to a reasonable extent, but we have some way to go in order to get to a place where we, as a society, celebrate whatever a young person thinks is best for them and their abilities, and help them on their journey.

Before I ask my question, I want to say something—I note that it is anecdotal—in response to what the cabinet secretary said earlier about conditions and wanting to address some of the profession’s concerns about them. Her points on that were really well made. During the pay dispute, the vast majority of the emails that I received as a constituency MSP were about conditions rather than about pay.

I agree that taking the teaching profession with us, so to speak, on reform is so important. I, too, was working in a school when curriculum for excellence was introduced. The anecdotal feedback then was that it had perhaps been slightly rushed, due mainly to political pressure. All of us would be well served, and would serve our constituents better, if we were to keep that in mind. I agree that we should work towards reform at a reasonable pace, but we should do so in a way that considers the pressures on the profession. Those were important points that you made, cabinet secretary.

I turn to the question that I originally wanted to ask, which relates to the fact that reform is not just about practicalities and processes but about approaches and attitudes. We have heard much about parity of esteem through the various reports that have been published and through our discussions and evidence sessions. Achieving such parity is so important in meeting 21st century needs and achieving wider reform in the area. How is the Government ensuring that parents, carers and family members have a better understanding of the various learning pathways and opportunities available for children and young people, such as going into apprenticeships or the workplace as an alternative to further and higher education? How can we change the unhelpfully prejudiced view in our society that some routes are better than others? We have done a lot in that space, but we need to do more.

I agree with that and with your points about the need for consistency—the minister made the same points last week—and for young people to be aware of what is available to them. That is the crucial next step.

Can I come in, convener?

Thanks very much. Professor Parsons made some important points there. There are instances—I can think of at least one in my constituency—where public bodies and agencies have to interact with private landowners. Is that not one of the areas of consideration where the use of legal mechanisms may be beneficial for the common good in certain circumstances?

And—

Having that expertise is also really significant for communities and those who bring any challenge so that they know in which direction to turn. I do not know whether you want to say anything more about that. It seems quite a clunky and cluttered landscape at the moment. Is the Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Act 2018 relevant here? Is that making a difference in the here and now? I do not know whether you want to add any more on that.

It is related to what Mr Austin has just said. Panel members have made strong arguments why, in your view, there should be an environmental court, but, regarding the compliance with the Aarhus convention, the Scottish Government’s review accepts that there is a need to consider improvements to access to justice in principle and sets out a number of proposals, in particular proposals to tackle the prohibitive costs of legal action. Mr Austin, you gave some views in your previous answer, but do you or other panellists have any further views on the proposed reforms from the Government in its response?

It would be about building a mechanism for justice for the medium to long term, not just in the years ahead. Jamie Whittle, you talked about the commercial specialist court. Approximately how many years has that been in place? Decades?