
SQA interim chief says politics will not halt reform
Officials say the formal changeover to Qualifications Scotland will happen in December 2025.
Despite this, the SQA's interim chief executive John Booth has said that work reforming the SQA is already underway. Furthermore, although he has confidence that MSPs will work together to pass the legislation, he said no political roadblocks will stop the organisation from changing.
'We are spending a lot of time rebuilding our relationships and trying to win back people's trust where we have lost that trust. The shift to the use of more digital technology to deliver qualifications and assessments will continue.
'The reform that we are doing of qualifications, looking at the balance of assessments, looking at the portfolio of qualifications and making sure that that is fit for purpose and giving young people and other learners the skills they need to thrive in the modern workplace.
'All of that work can and will continue. This is a transformation journey.
'The transformation activity will happen regardless of the passage of the bill.'
The bill's progress through Holyrood is looking like an increasingly rocky road, however.
As reported in The Herald, MSPs submitted more than 350 amendments to the bill, and there have been other reports that the Education Reform Programme Board has concerns about the cost of reform and the 'tight timeline' for delivering changes to the exam body.
The Education (Scotland) Bill promises a restructuring of some aspects of the current SQA, including making dedicated roles for teachers and students and siloing the organisation's awarding and accreditation duties.
Currently, the SQA serves two main functions: awarding qualifications such as National 5s Highers, vocational and more; and regulating all qualifications providers in Scotland.
What to do with these powers and where to house them has become a major point of contention.
SQA officials currently describe a system in which the organisation's awarding and accreditation functions are already separate and operate independently.
However, opposition MSPs and voices outside of Holyrood maintain that awarding and accreditation powers cannot be fully separate as long as they are under the same roof. A government-commissioned report explicitly argued that the two functions should be formally separated and carried out by separate bodies.
Three major amendments to the current bill, one lodged by the Scottish Conservatives, one by Scottish Labour, and one by the Liberal Democrats, sought to strip Qualifications Scotland of its accreditation powers and move them to another organisation.
It is unclear what will come of these, however. At a recent meeting of Holyrood's Education, Children and Young People's Committee, committee members who had lodged these amendments were met with resistance from Cabinet Secretary Jenny Gilruth who pointed to a series of challenges in splitting the SQA's powers.
The debate eventually circled around to discussions of finding a solution involving the "least worst" options and warnings from Ms Gilruth that spending too much time finding alternatives could delay reform.
While the details are debated in Holyrood, work is underway to reshape the SQA, how it operates and, more importantly for some officials, where it fits in the education system.
Many early critics of the education bill worried that it did not go far enough in forcing changes in the ways the SQA operates. For instance, the apparent total rollover of staff and retention of its key powers do not address the NASUWT's concerns about the SQA's 'over-emphasis on assessment and bureaucracy which is disempowering teachers.'
The bill does, however, leave room for the new qualifications body to self-police and to address its problematic relationships with teachers and students.
As unions, the government, education experts and SQA leadership have all warned, however, it is not possible to legislate a change of culture and much of the crucial work of reform will need to come from within the organisation.
In an exclusive interview with The Herald, Mr Booth said that reforming the country's qualifications body – whether it is called the SQA or Qualifications Scotland – cannot wait for legislation to be passed or for an official name change.
Mr Booth joined the SQA in 2021 as the director of communications. He said that one of the reasons he believes that the transformation work will continue with or without any changeover is because he feels there is a 'huge appetite for change' in the SQA and that transformation might have come sooner without the setbacks to relationships obstacles in delivery that were caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
'If Covid had never happened, I think a lot of the things I'm describing now in terms of transformation would be happening anyway. We are an awarding body that needs to always move with the times.
'There is a huge appetite for change in this organisation, and it frustrates me sometimes that I think there is a sense that somehow the SQA is acting against the interests of the education system.'
Recent scandals have illustrated this. Following the release of the 2024 exam results, the SQA was engulfed in a controversy over the declining pass rates in Higher History.
Beyond the results themselves, however, emails and parliamentary hearings revealed evidence that SQA officials had told a group of history teachers to recall a teacher survey critical of the SQA's culture and that the organisation was serving as an intermediary between an SQA employee and concerned teachers on behalf of the employee's union.
Since then, there has been a change in leadership but stakeholders are still waiting to see how the next few months will unfold. The latest exam season has already seen hiccups, with the SQA accidentally releasing incorrect files to prospective markers and a late change to the schedule sparking controversy among some subject teachers and students.
In December, however, there should be a new system in place and Mr Booth said that there will need to be a new way of working regardless of the name above the door.
'Seven months today, subject to Parliament passing the education bill, Qualifications Scotland comes into existence.
'Seven months sounds like a long time, but it is not. We have got to make sure that we move successfully and change from the SQA to Qualifications Scotland and everything that entails.
'But that does not stop on day one of the organisation. Trust is hard won but it is easily lost. So, you cannot stop for a minute in terms of continuing to ensure people have trust in you.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
10 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Just work in a cupboard, says SNP minister in row over soaring business rates
Businesses can avoid paying high rates by setting up in cupboards, the Deputy First Minister has said. Kate Forbes said the most profitable firms are 'smaller ones' which can operate from a 'cupboard, where there are no rates'. Her suggestion came during a Scottish parliament debate on whether the 'current rates regime' prevents companies from 'scaling up'. Ms Forbes admitted the rates system is 'based on an older version of the economy' which did not apply in 'our new, tech-driven environment'. Last night Scottish Tory economy spokesman Murdo Fraser said: 'Kate Forbes' view of how businesses work is so detached from reality that she might as well have claimed Narnia is at the back of the cupboard. 'She must know it's nonsense to suggest that manufacturing, hospitality, retail or a host of other businesses could operate in this way. 'And it's downright insulting to downplay the cost of rates, when the SNP withheld relief available elsewhere in the UK, putting Scottish firms at a huge disadvantage.' At Holyrood, Scottish Tory MSP Liam Kerr asked Ms Forbes: 'Does the Government think that the way in which the current rates regime is structured militates against small businesses scaling up?' She replied that it did not because of the small business bonus scheme which she said 'remains the most generous across the United Kingdom'. Ms Forbes, who is also Economy Secretary, said the 'rates system often does not take into account the fact that some of the most profitable businesses are the smaller ones'. She said: 'A start-up can be launched from a cupboard, where there are no rates, while a large and perhaps less profitable business has to pay them.' Speaking in the Holyrood debating chamber on Wednesday, Ms Forbes said the rates system is 'based on an older version of the economy, in which the size of properties was linked to profitability, and that is just not the case in our new, tech-driven environment'. Commenting last night, Glasgow-based businessman Donald MacLeod said: 'This is very disappointing – the SNP appears to have given up on business. 'Businesses in the hospitality sector are falling by the wayside and finding it really tough – and there's no support there. 'For some, a cupboard might be ok – if you were a one-person business – but clearly it doesn't work for nightclubs, bars and restaurants. 'We need to be incentivising and supporting businesses – not telling them to set up a in a cupboard. 'This is mind-boggling stupidity from Kate Forbes - it is utterly absurd. 'Businesses are on their knees - and we have a government which is economically illiterate.' It came as Ms Forbes criticised about the impact of the SNP's policies after questioning why there is an 'obsession' with income tax rates in Scotland. Following a keynote speech at economic think tank Adam Smith House, she said: 'In Scotland there seems to be an obsession with income tax as though it's the only tax businesses and individuals have to grapple with.' Scotland is the only part of Britain not cutting business rates for shops this year. The Welsh Government announced it will provide 40 per cent relief for all firms in the retail, hospitality and leisure industries. It came after Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a 40 per cent relief package for the same sectors in England as part of her Budget. But the SNP government Budget unveiled in December means retailers in Scotland businesses are receiving less support than those in other parts of Britain this year. Businesses are also struggling with the UK Government's hike in National Insurance employers' contributions, which began in April. It emerged in January that companies based in Scotland will pay £55million more tax than those in England because SNP ministers have not delivered on a promise to give them a level playing field. SNP ministers confirmed that firms based in larger premises in Scotland will pay £54.7million more in business rates than those in England in the year beginning in April. Shops will pay £9.1million more than those south of the Border, while offices will pay an additional £6.4million and hotels face an extra £2.5million bill. In its 2021 manifesto, the SNP promised to ensure that 'the largest businesses pay the same combined poundage in Scotland as in England'.


Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reform's non-stop psychodrama threatens to drive voters away
Nigel Farage was given just 10 minutes' warning before Zia Yusuf unleashed an earthquake that could shatter Reform UK's electoral fortunes. The party leader said that after a telephone conversation on Wednesday morning, he thought Mr Yusuf had 'had enough' of politics. But it was on Thursday evening that Reform's chairman resigned in the latest in a series of internal disputes that has begun to distract from the party's electoral success. As voters were trickling out of polling booths in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election in Scotland, where Reform's position looks strong, Mr Yusuf announced he no longer thought working for the party was a 'good use of his time'. The barely veiled implication was that he does not believe Mr Farage should be prime minister – a stunning admission from a man who has made putting Reform in Downing Street his single goal since the days after last year's general election. Mr Yusuf, a successful entrepreneur and millionaire, was hired to professionalise the party's candidate selection, fundraising and day-to-day operations. Under his leadership, Reform has moved into a plush new Westminster headquarters, won a parliamentary by-election and majorities on 10 English councils, and placed itself in the crosshairs of Sir Keir Starmer. There was also an almighty row with Rupert Lowe, one of the five MPs Reform voted in at the 2024 election, who fell out with Mr Yusuf and was reported to the parliamentary authorities and police for bullying, which he denies. Mr Farage backed his chairman and suspended the whip from Mr Lowe in March, and both sides have since sued each other. It proved a bitter row, but one that Mr Yusuf survived. As recently as Monday, Mr Farage told The Telegraph that while the 38-year-old businessman was 'new to the game', he would 'be around for many, many years to come', and would play a 'significant role in shaping the future of the country'. The fact that he resigned four days later is a testament to the work Reform still needs to do to become a general election-winning machine. Reform sources say there has been a dispute in the party for some time over what exactly Mr Yusuf should do in his role as chairman. As a recent graduate of Britain's business world, he was the obvious choice to lead 'UK Doge', Reform's Elon Musk-inspired efficiency drive in the councils it now runs. But that shift, from running Reform to the 'Doge' role, has led to the rise of another figure, 24-year-old Aaron Lobo, who served as Mr Farage's producer at GB News and has recently become Reform's operations manager. The divide between the party's political team and Mr Yusuf's more managerial role was laid bare on Wednesday at Prime Minister's Questions, when Sarah Pochin, the newest Reform MP, asked Sir Keir whether he would ban the burka. Mr Yusuf, who is a Muslim, said he only learnt about the question when he saw it online. He later added he thought it was 'dumb' for a party to ask the Government to endorse policies it did not support. But it later emerged that other party figures were more open to banning the burka than he expected. Lee Anderson, the chief whip, said he agreed they should be outlawed, adding: 'No one should be allowed to hide their identity in public.' Mr Farage said the public 'do deserve a debate' about banning religious face coverings. He added, in an interview with GB News, that he had known about the question in advance. The row was remarkable not just for its contents – which led to accusations of racism from Labour – but because it played out in public. If Mr Yusuf was in charge of his party, why did he not know what was going on? And why would he respond to his colleagues online, rather than in the office? Sources close to the party say that Mr Yusuf has become increasingly uncomfortable with the level of scrutiny his dispute with Mr Lowe brought, and had complained that every time he went on a national broadcast channel, he received a deluge of racist abuse online. On Thursday night, Mr Farage blamed 'alt-Right' abuse of Mr Yusuf online and claimed criticism of him on X had begun to upset him in recent weeks. The Telegraph understands he also found it difficult to bridge the gap between the party's more aggressive wing, once led by Mr Lowe, and attempts to become more moderate to attract disaffected Conservative voters. Unfortunately for Mr Farage, the incident is only the latest in a series of high-profile rows between the party leader and his senior colleagues. In his remarkable and lengthy political career, the veteran Brexiteer has fallen out with Ukip colleagues Mark Reckless, Douglas Carswell, Godfrey Bloom and Suzanne Evans, and the Reform deputy leader Ben Habib. Reform already has an uphill battle in convincing voters that it is a credible political force before the next general election. Mr Farage has done an impressive job in building a party with five MPs into a project with a seven-point poll lead over Labour that has all but killed off the Conservatives. The fact there are now Reform-run councils across the country is a boon. However, turning Reform's momentum in opposition into the sense it is a party of government will be much harder, and endless rows and resignations will not give voters any confidence on that front. Plus, if the row over the burka ban is genuinely the reason for Mr Yusuf's resignation, there are also policy questions to be asked. Chiefly, how much does Mr Farage want to rely on migration and race issues for votes? Will he tolerate his party's MPs criticising core beliefs of Muslims in the Commons chamber? Mr Farage, aided by Mr Yusuf, has come to think about his party as more of a political business than a party in the traditional Westminster mould. In the early-stage startup world, rows between executives over the direction of their projects are not uncommon – as Mr Yusuf has no doubt experienced. But stopping the in-fighting and resignations is now a business-critical issue. Reform's psychodrama risks driving voters back to Labour and the Conservatives, at a time when it must maintain its position in the polls or fizzle out.


The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Eradicating child poverty must become Labour's central mission
It is much more than a flip rhetorical cliche to say that if a nation thinks that fighting child poverty is costly, then it should try the alternative. It really should not be a matter of great controversy. The broadly warm welcome given to the government's expansion of the free school meals programme has been marred only by some noisy mumblings about how the policy will be funded. Of course, any item of public spending must be accounted for – but in the case of this and similar measures to alleviate child poverty, both sides of the ledger should be taken into account. Experience in Scotland, Wales and London – where free and nutritious meals are already available more widely – suggests that pupils perform better on a full stomach; something that surely accords with common sense. Academic studies go further, linking higher educational achievements with higher productivity and thus better living standards for those lifted out of poverty – with an obvious dividend for the nation as a whole. Official support for children, including the new breakfast clubs, a wider availability of free school meals, childcare, access to libraries, affordable housing and of course their education itself, should be treated less as 'current' spending and more like an investment. These are the kind of arguments The Independent has long put forward, as part of an award-winning campaign, and are compatible with fiscal sustainability. In essence, though it is not meant to be mercenary, money spent on rearing a healthier, more literate, more numerate and more intellectually able generation is, in the long run, as valid an investment as, say, building a new tramway or bolstering the national grid. 'Human capital' is, ironically, more precious than ever in a world where artificial intelligence will take over so many of the tasks currently undertaken by human beings. For people to enjoy socially useful and economically viable lives in the future, they will need to be smarter than the machines that will surround them. Soon enough, chancellor Rachel Reeves will be able to go further and faster, as the current ministerial catchphrase goes, in the Labour government's newfound mission to reduce child poverty. After years when the party seemed to be undeclared disciples of the austerity school of economics, Labour's conscience, albeit prompted by some shocking electoral setbacks, has been awoken. Eradicating child poverty by 2020 was the noble objective set by Tony Blair early in the last Labour government, enshrined in law during the last days of Gordon Brown's administration, revived in Jeremy Corbyn's time, but frankly neglected, beyond some necessary lip service, in more recent years. Now, it has rightly become a priority, and one that has lodged itself high on the long list of social challenges facing the chancellor. It now seems inevitable that the two-cap limit on child benefit, imposed by a Tory chancellor almost a decade ago, will be lifted, sooner or later, and perhaps 300,000 children in larger families lifted out of poverty immediately. That it will be partly under populist pressure from Nigel Farage does not make it a bad idea. Extending child benefit, like school meals, is not a total cure for child poverty. Where the Tories had a point as they downgraded the poverty targets in the past (which, to be clear, was a mistake) was when they stressed the importance of a healthy economy creating well-paid jobs. Child poverty is linked to general levels of poverty, obviously, and the creation of wealth still counts as the essential basis for a fairer society – and human capital is part of that. Even with these latest measures, continuing care will need to be taken to make sure the free school meals are nutritious and promote good physical and mental health. Other policy areas also need to be attended to. No level of child benefit or childcare will entirely compensate for being brought up in a cramped, overcrowded, mouldy, cold home. Other policies will thus have to contribute to giving every British child the best opportunities in life. In that context, the government's child poverty task force might consider how the SureStart centres could be restored. Arguably the most serious misjudgement of the coalition government of 2010 to 2014 was to scrap them. In any case, without much in the way of conscious effort, indeed almost by accident, Sir Keir Starmer's government has found itself endowed with a new, invigorating mission to pursue. For all the problems, disappointments, gaffes and missteps in their first year out of the wilderness, the Labour Party has rediscovered its raison d'etre.