Chamber and committees

I am grateful for the answer, but I will press you on that specific report recommendation. You said that it took time to secure responses from the interested parties. Have you had all the responses from the interested parties? In any event, can I press you on when we might see, or whether we will see, a plan for how to take forward the recommendations?

If no one else wants to come in, I will hand back to the convener.

Good morning, panel. Chris Ranson, I want to ask about exactly the same point but look at it from the other end. Presumably generative AI reflects its source material. How will educators as a general category—and Professor Robertson might wish to come in after this, too—ensure that learners understand that the source material might be skewed and, therefore, treat the outputs with sufficient caution?

It was about questioning the source material.

I am very grateful to you all.

I will now move to Ollie Bray. Obviously, you can answer that question if you wish to, Ollie. However, on a slightly different issue, the ability to put into practice the skills that the others have talked about will be impacted by access to IT. Is there not a risk of a digital divide emerging, with certain groups having access and gaining practice and other groups not? If I am right about that, how do we ensure that the use of AI does not, perhaps inadvertently, widen education gaps?

Good morning, panel. My question is for Fraser McKinlay. I will stick with something that Ross Greer was examining. You said earlier that this agenda is wider than just the care system and that there needs to be change across the whole system. You also alluded, in your answer to Mr Greer, to the extent of your powers. How can The Promise Scotland drive and help to embed system change, given the current extent of your role? Are there any tools that you could use that are not currently available to you?

I have one quick question for Claire Burns on something that she brought up earlier. Claire, you mentioned local authorities several times. The Improvement Service published a report in February this year about how local authorities are delivering on the Promise, and it was something of a mixed bag. It suggested that there were issues around where delivery sits, the monitoring of progress—it was suggested that that is perhaps often driven by external considerations rather than by children and families—and with funding, especially around timescales.

Will you help the committee to understand why that is still the situation at local authorities? Who needs to step up and what can meaningfully be done?

I understand. Thanks for that.

Fraser McKinlay has just brought up what he called “the accountability bit”. The Promise Scotland’s “Plan 21-24” sets out five priority areas. Earlier, Kevin Mitchell, you mentioned that work on that has been tough, for the various reasons that you gave. What changes has the Care Inspectorate made to inspection and regulation in line with “Plan 21-24”, and is there anything further planned?

I understand that.

Good morning. I will direct my initial question to Peter Bain, but anyone else who wants to contribute can catch my eye. You made some comments earlier about the number and range of subjects. How do schools decide on the number and range of subjects, and is that the same across Scotland? If that is done at an entirely local level, how independent is that and how much is it dictated by resourcing and by the availability of specialist teachers, which you alluded to earlier?