June 2025. We provided MSPs with a briefing ahead of their consideration of this bill which, amongst other measures, replaced the SQA with a new qualifications body and re-establishes an independent HMIE.

When we were preparing our current Strategic Plan,[1] we asked children across Scotland what the most important children’s rights issues were. It was clear that education was their top priority[2] and that, in particular, there was a need for significant culture change across the education system.

We recently published This is our lives, it matters a lot, which set what our office has heard from children and young people across Scotland in the context of children’s right to an education[3]. We have subsequently published Exclusion labelled as support, on care experienced children and young people’s experiences of education[4] and highlighted good practice from e-Sgoil on Alternative education provision for children”[5] which highlights the experiences ofonline learning of young people we have worked with.

Our engagement with this Bill

The Commissioner supported the general principles of this Bill at Stage 1, but noted that it will not address the fundamental change children and young people want to see in Scottish education.

Our Stage 1 written evidence addresses the proposals in the bill as originally published in detail.[6] We also provided oral evidence at Stage 1[7] and in our Stage 1[8] and Stage 2 briefings we called significant amendments to the Bill to ensure that children’s right to participate in decision making (Article 12 UNCRC) was fully respected and enshrined in law in the structure of the new bodies created by the Bill.

Our approach to these amendments

As at Stage 2, there are many amendments on structures which we feel would equally meet children’s rights.  The choice between these is primarily a political decision for Parliament to make. For example, we have not taken a position on the independence of the Chief Inspector. In human rights terms, a system of inspection of schools is one approach that a State can take to ensure that all children’s rights are respected in education, but there is no human rights basis for preferring any particular model. As a result, there are some groupings in which we are making no comments and taking no position. Likewise we have not taken a position on all amendments, including those which are subsequential, minor or technical.

Group 1: Support Needs

Our understanding is that these amendments are intended to ensure that children, young people and adult learners outwith school have the same access to support when sitting qualifications as children in school. On that basis we support all amendments in this group. We would welcome a commitment from the Cabinet Secretary that any accompanying guidance will broaden access to support.

Group 4: Qualifications Scotland: duties when exercising functions

This grouping contains a range of amendments which will strengthen duties on Qualifications Scotland, including to consult and work with other agencies. We welcome amendments 101 which requires Qualifications Scotland to have regard to the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). We previously highlighted the importance of the SCQF in recognising the diversity of qualifications available to children and young people.

Group 5: Strategic Advisory Council

In our previous evidence and briefings we highlighted the importance of ensuring children’s participation within the governance structures of Qualifications Scotland (and HMIE). However, we cautioned against a tokenistic approach, with one or two children added to a formal group dominated by adults. Even with proper support, it would be difficult for a child to represent the diverse interests of all children. On balance, we concluded that for the Strategic Advisory Council (SAC) and the Qualifications Scotland board, it was sufficient for children’s interests to be represented by an adult, if that role is underpinned by a properly resourced participation function. We therefore welcome the inclusion of amendment 111. Whilst amendment 124 does not include children and young people, we welcome the addition here of the Learner Interest Committee, which will include children and young people.

Group 7: Charters

We support both amendments 129 and 130, which will ensure a diverse range of people, including children and young people, are able to participate in the development of the Learner Charter.

We thank the member for lodging amendment 131 which specifically requires Qualifications Scotland to include any children and young people. We feel that children who are yet to take a qualification are also important stakeholders and should be included. We are disappointed that 131, with its broader reach, will be pre-empted by 129 or 130 if they pass.

We oppose amendment 134. It is important to see children and young people (and adult learners) as the key stakeholders for the Learner Charter. Our view is that this amendment could allow the SAC (and effectively, the education “system”) to over-ride the views of children and young people expressed during the development of the charter. We note this amendment only requires “due regard” to be taken of the SAC’s recommendations, but we still cannot support it.

Group 8: Corporate plan of Qualifications Scotland

We support amendment 148 which broadens the range of people Qualifications Scotland must consult before preparing their Corporate Plan.

Group 10: Interest Committees of Qualifications Scotland

We welcome amendment 155 which will provide important transparency on Qualifications Scotland’s interaction with the various Committees established by this Bill. We particularly welcome the requirement for Qualifications Scotland to provide its response to this advice. Following the issues which arose in 2020, children and young people told us that they felt that the SQA did not listen to their views.

We welcome amendment 291 which recognises the importance of children and young people yet to take a relevant qualification are also important stakeholders for Qualifications Scotland. In our recent engagement work with children we have heard views about assessment and exams, and the anxiety they can cause, from children still in primary school.[9]

We support amendment 295 which ensures that the Learner Committee is able to request a meeting if none is planned.

We oppose amendment 296. We recognise the important role parents play in children’s lives and their valid interest in the qualifications their children are doing.  On that basis, we supported amendments at Stage 2 which strengthened parent representation on the

We oppose amendment 298. We would not normally comment on adult representation but note that children and young people take SQA in a range of settings other than college or school. For example Modern Apprenticeships are often delivered by employers, particularly in the public sector. We therefore prefer the existing wording of section 11(3A)(b).

Group 13: Purpose of inspection

We support the Cabinet Secretary’s amendment 17 on the Purpose of Inspection. It is useful to have this in legislation.

We oppose amendments 18 and 45. Our view is that these amendments would take the focus of inspection away from teaching and learning, and from the rights and best interests of children and young people.

Group 14: Frequency of inspection

We agree that it is useful to have a minimum frequency for inspections, but we do not think it is appropriate for it to be in primary legislation. This would not give HMIE or schools the flexibility to respond to unexpected situations, as they were able to do during the Covid-19 pandemic. We therefore support the Cabinet Secretary’s amendment 24 which strikes the right balance between clear expectations and flexibility.

We welcome the proposal for frequency of inspection to be based on risk and therefore support amendments 229 and 230. Our view is that there is a need for more frequent inspection in some education establishments (i.e. secure and residential special schools) and also that individual schools may in some circumstances need to inspected more frequently.

We support amendment 241 allows schools to request an inspection, with a requirement for HMIE to give reasons if they decide not to conduct it.

Group 15: Functions of the Chief Inspector

We recognise that there have been calls to strengthen the oversight of home education, including in the Scottish Government’s consultation and that these are grounded in concerns about children’s right to an education and child protection. However, we feel that the case for a formal inspection model has not yet been made. The ability for an inspector to enter private homes, in particular, may cause considerable distress and serve to alienate children and their families.

Instead, engagement with children who are home educated and their families should be based on building supportive, mutually respectful relationships, as highlighted in the analysis of the Scottish Government’s consultation.[10] We therefore oppose amendments 204 and 205.

We recognise the intent behind amendment 206, however we feel it is important that there continues to be inspection of early learning, as well as childcare, that is provided by childminders. We believe that similar streamlining could be achieved via existing joint inspection arrangements between the Care Inspectorate and HMIE. 

We welcome and support amendment 210. At Stage 1 we raised concerns about a potential gap in inspection of how Education Authorities are fulfilling their safeguarding duties where there are concerns about an employee. This amendment will help address that.

Group 16: Involvement of teachers, college staff and others in inspection matters

We oppose amendments 29, 30, 38 and 39. These require co-design of and consultation on inspections to take place with various groups of adults, but do not include children and young people. We support amendment 235, 239 and 240, which broaden participation.

Group 17: Chief Inspector: duties when exercising functions

We support amendments 211, 213, 214 and 215. We particularly like amendment 217 which requires HMIE to challenge unnecessary bureaucracy and to offer practical assistance to schools and local authorities.

We support amendment 218 which (alongside amendment 210) helps to address the gap we previously raised in child protection and safeguarding procedures. As employers, Education Authorities are responsible for investigating complaints about school staff (including non-GTCS registered staff) and we are concerned that no one oversees this process and believe that HMIE are well placed to do this given their existing remit to look at Education Authorities.

We would welcome reassurances from Scottish Government that they will produce guidance for HMIE in relation to their role in safeguarding.

Group 19: Inspection plan

We welcome and support amendment 232 which requires the Inspection Plan to include details on how schools will be evaluated in relation to better securing children’s rights. We would expect this to include consideration of the full range of rights contained within the UNCRC.

Amendment 233 will ensure that educational establishments’ duty of care both to children and young people and to staff is considered as part of inspections.

Group 21: Board members of Qualifications Scotland

We support amendment 269 which will ensure that the interests of children and young people are represented on the Qualifications Scotland board. As previously noted, our view is that, on balance, it is not necessarily a requirement for a child to be on the board. A representative of a children’s organisation would be well placed to fulfil this role. We support amendment 274 which would require Scottish Ministers to encourage children and young people to apply.

[1] CYPCS, 2024. Strategic Plan 2024-2028.  https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/our-plan-2024-28/

[2] The other priorities identified were poverty, mental health, discrimination and climate change.

[3] CYPCS, 2025. This is our lives, it matters a lot. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/this-is-our-lives-it-matters-a-lot-putting-childrens-rights-at-the-heart-of-education/

[4] CYPCS & Who Cares? Scotland. 2025. Exclusion labelled as support. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/wpcypcs/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Who-Cares-Education-Report.pdf

[5] CYPCS, 2025.  Alternative education provision for children. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/alternative-education-provision-for-children-learning-from-the-e-sgoil-model/

[6] CYPCS, 2024. Education Bill Stage 1 evidence. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/ed-bill-2024/

[7] Scottish Parliament, 2 October 2024. Official report. https://www.parliament.scot/api/sitecore/CustomMedia/OfficialReport?meetingId=16032

[8] CYPCS, 2024. MSP Briefing: Education Bill  – Stage 1. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/msp-briefing-education-scotland-bill-stage-1/

[9] CYPCS, 2025. This is our lives, it matters a lot. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/this-is-our-lives-it-matters-a-lot-putting-childrens-rights-at-the-heart-of-education/ page 30

[10] Scottish Government, 2023. Home education guidance: consultation guidance.  https://www.gov.scot/publications/home-education-guidance-consultation-analysis-report