Minutes
Meeting of the Board of Directors
A meeting of the Board of Directors was held on Thursday 16 December 2010 at 9.30am in the
Ramillies Room, Beardmore Hotel, Clydebank, G81 4SA.
Present:
Jim Conroy, Board Member
Paul Harris, Board Member
Louise Hayward, Board Member
Bernard McLeary, Chief Executive and Board Member
Graeme Ogilvy, Deputy Chair
Ken Thomson, Board Member
In attendance:
Eileen Gill, Chief Professional Adviser, Strategic Organisational Development
Alistair Gordon, Director - Corporate Services
Anne Jardine, Director – Learning and Community
Kay Livingston, Director – International, Research and Innovation
Catherine MacIntyre, Professional Adviser, Policy & Governance
Murray McVicar, Scottish Government
Apologies:
Alan Armstrong, Director – Curriculum and Assessment
Jacqui Hepburn, Board Member
Iain Nisbet, Board Member
Christine Pollock, Cosla Observer
Maureen Verrall, Scottish Government
Gavin Whitefield, Special Adviser
1.
Due Date
Alistair
Dec 10
Welcome / Apologies
1.1
Aplogies
1.1.1
2.
Action
As noted above.
Minute of the Previous Meeting + AGM + Action Grid + Note of Closed
Session Discussion held on 20 October 2010
2.1
The Minute (and Action Grid) of the previous meeting held on
20 October 2010 were accepted as a true record. The Record Note
of the Closed Session Discussion will be dealt with later on the
agenda.
2.2
The Minute and Action Grid will now be published on the website,
subject to any FOI exemptions.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
1
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
3.
Matters Arising from the Previous Minutes – 20 October 2010
3.1
Interim CMT Structure (Item 6.1 refers)
3.1.1
3.2
3.3
Paul advised that a series of meetings have been put into
diaries on a 6 weekly basis. The next meeting is scheduled
to take place in January 2011 and it is expected that there
will be actions arising from that meeting.
Chief Executive’s Report – SLF (Item 8.4 refers)
3.3.1
In response to a question from Ken, Bernard confirmed that
SLF would be a priority for next year. However, it was likely
that the model would need to be reviewed in terms of
resourcing.
Declarations of Interest
4.1
5.
The Board noted that as a result of the additional role that
Eileen has taken on within the Scottish Government’s
SEQIA Project Implementation Team, CMT leadership
responsibility for Learning and Technology has now
transferred to Kay.
Education and the Arts – Culture & Creativity: An Action Plan
(Item 8.3 refers)
3.2.1
4.
Due Date
None.
Deputy Chair’s Report
5.1
SEQIA
5.1.1
Graeme advised that Jamie Hume, Agency Creation and
Development Director, was holding a series of meetings with
LTS (HMIE and Scottish Government) staff.
5.1.2
Graeme was also scheduled to meet with Jamie earlier in
December, but that meeting had to be postponed until
January. A meeting is also being arranged for Jamie to
meet with the Board in January and that will provide an
opportunity to raise questions and discuss issues.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
2
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
Due Date
5.2 ELL Ministerial Meeting
6.
5.2.1
Graeme advised Board Members that the follow up meeting
with Ministers in November had been cancelled and will now
take place in January
5.2.2
Graeme also reported that he had met with the Chief
Executive of NHS Education. There was broad agreement
that some statutory training requirements could be the same
across a number of agencies and further work was now
being taken forward to look at efficiencies and cost savings.
5.2.3
Finally, Board Members noted that Angela Constance had
been appointed as the new Minister for Skills and Lifelong
Learning. Graeme met the Minister briefly and commented
that the Ministerial advisory and support team will continue
as before. One of the Minister’s priorities is to meet formally
with Graeme, but it is recognised that time may be limited as
a result of the forthcoming elections.
CSR and Scottish Government Draft Budget: Implications for LTS
6.1
6.2
Bernard introduced and spoke to this paper. The Board received a
detailed briefing which included the following key points:
6.1.1
The draft figure of £17.3m for financial year 2011/12
represented a severe cut (approximately £8.5m) to the LTS
budget over one year.
6.1.2
LTS remains committed to delivering Ministerial priorities.
6.1.3
LTS has substantial fixed costs, eg Interconnect.
6.1.4
A key issue is the Scottish Government’s conceptualisation
and structure of the budget. LTS needs to work on the
£17.3m as a whole budget with no ring fencing otherwise it
will not be possible to deliver.
Board Members were also reminded that LTS can demonstrate that
it delivered on the efficiencies required by the Scottish Government.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
3
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
6.3
Alistair confirmed that, arithmetically,it is possible to meet the
reduced budget figure of £17.3m. However, after subtracting direct
staffing costs of approximately £12.5m and £2.1m for Janet and the
Interconnect, it not only leaves very little funding for delivery of
Ministerial priorities but also renders the organisation facing severe
challenges in terms of ensuring appropriate resources.
6.4
Murray advised the Scottish Government is hoping that it will be a
single budget with no ring fencing. Murray went on to say that he
appreciated that previous funding models had not been helpful in
allowing LTS to take a more strategic view. However, Ministers had
to take some very difficult decisions over the last few weeks and
there was a commitment to protect frontline services. The Scottish
Government is not unaware that this is challenging.
6.5
The Board discussed the need for dialogue between LTS and the
Scottish Government to ensure that there is absolute clarity around
LTS priorities which must take into account affordability – this is
responsible governance. It does not make sense to transfer
commitments into the new body that the new body then cannot
deliver. Therefore, the Scottish Government needs to come forward
with a clear set of priorities.
6.6
Murray agreed that there would need to be discussions and
understood that LTS needs to deliver a balanced budget. However,
the Scottish Government needs to take a view over the whole year
in terms of the new agency. Jim cautioned that if LTS becomes
debilitated, then there will be difficulties in terms of what will transfer
to the new agency.
6.7
Graeme stated that the Board responsibilities at this time sit with
LTS and a balanced budget will be required even if just for 3 months
from April to June. Graeme asked that Murray convey this to
Scottish Government colleagues. The Board also has responsibility
for staff. Graeme acknowledged Murray’s points, but emphasised
that the Board has a clear governance responsibility was from now
until end June 2011.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
4
Due Date
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
6.8
Due Date
The Board then had a lengthy discussion. The following points
emerged:
6.8.1 Scottish Government colleagues were aware of the detail of
LTS budget commitments, including contractual obligations
which in effect makes the cut more than 35%.
6.8.2 The Scottish Government has provided LTS with a set of high
level outcomes and priorities for next year and now wants LTS
to come back with proposals setting out what can be
delivered. The difficulty is that LTS is caught in the middle of
delivering Ministerial priorities with severely reduced
resources.
6.8.3 There is also the issue of next year’s Pay Policy Guidance
and there are legal issues around TUPE transfer which may
prevent redeployment of staff ahead of transfer to the new
agency.
6.8.4 It is still not clear if the Lifelong Learning funding is ring
fenced.
6.8.5 The priorities from the Scottish Government are helpful, but
are essentially the same as last year – nothing has changed
apart from the decrease in funding.
6.8.6 The question of whether the Minister understood the LTS
budget was raised and the implications of Scottish
Government policy in terms of staffing. It was agreed that the
Board may need to raise this
6.8.7 It is important now to manage expectations both within the
Scottish Government and with stakeholders. The need to be
clear about what can be delivered over the 3 months from
April to June 2011 cannot be emphasised enough.
6.8.8 At its meeting in November, Ken said that the Audit
Committee had been frustrated, confused and disappointed
about the information made available regarding the budget.
LTS needs to have a balanced budget and review what can
then be delivered.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
5
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
6.9
Due Date
Alistair advised that the costs were illustrative only. In order to make
the necessary savings staffing levels would need to be reduced by
the end of March 2011. Louise said that this would devastate
support structures for CfE and there are, therefore, educational
implications. .
6.10 Graeme stated that a paper needs to be sent the Scottish
Government very quickly in the New Year which gives details of the
implications of the LTS budget cut. It is assumed that the new body
will have responsibility for CfE, for example, and the Scottish
Government needs to be aware that a number of the staff that are
likely to be ‘let go’ are in fact business critical.
7.
6.11 Bernard raised the matter of consultation which LTS is legally
obliged to carry out and asked Murray when LTS management could
advise staff and TUs of the termination of the Fixed Term contracts.
Murray suggested that the management should use their own
discretion, but he would confirm with Scottish Government
colleagues. Bernard emphasised that staff need to be advised no
later than week commencing 10 January 2011, otherwise there
would not be enough time to undertake the necessary consultation
process.
Murray
Dec 2010
6.12 In summary, Graeme said he wanted to be clear that the LTS Board
was not asking for more funding and also accepts that there will be a
new organisation. However, the Board wants to make the position
clear that whilst the budgets cuts can be achieved, the Scottish
Government needs to be aware of and understand the
consequences. The Board has a duty to advise the Scottish
Government of the situation and this will be outlined in Bernard’s
paper.
Bernard
Jan 2011
6.13 Finally, Bernard reminded Murray that clarification is required about
the Communities Team funding and expectations.
Murray
Jan 2011
SEQIA
7.1
Murray provided the Board with an update which included the
following points:
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
6
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
7.1.1
The Programme Board has been established comprising
Bernard, Bill Maxwell, Maureen Verrall and Jamie Hume.
7.1.2
A Programme Plan has been developed within which there
are six Projects:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)
v)
vi)
Due Date
Corporate Strategy
Stakeholder Engagement
Organisation Structure
Staffing and Change Management
Infrastructure
Communications
7.1.4
More detailed plans are being developed for each of the
Projects and will be included within the next Staff Bulletin.
7.1.5
Jamie is consulting / speaking to people and a high level
functions paper has now been produced. This will be
shared with staff and will then be the subject of wider
consultation in January, with the aim of having a more
detailed paper by the end of January.
7.1.6
A date is being identified for the Programme Board to meet
all TUs involved.
7.1.7
So far the Programme is on track, but there is a lot to deliver
by the end of June 2011.
7.2
Paul asked that if the mission, vision, etc., is still only in draft, what
was the predicating factor for setting up the new agency. Murray
explained that Ministers looked across the landscape and agreed
that there were other ways of delivering priorities. Paul queried what
drove the decision to change the landscape. Murray again stated
that Ministers felt there were other ways of delivering priorities and
added that this was not necessarily the end of the process.
7.3
Paul commented there was a real resonnance with the merged
Culture agencies and referred Board colleagues back to a previous
question – what stays and what goes? There is a challenging
timescale and the Scottish Government does not yet have the
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
7
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
Due Date
priorities for the new agency. If Creative Scotland is anything to by,
establishment of the new agency is not achievable. Jim added there
was a risk of serious reputational damage to the Scottish
Government if the new agency does not deliver.
7.5
Graeme asked about the proposal to establish a Challenge and
Support Forum and asked what progress had been made. Murray
said that there was still a question about TU representation, but that
the Forum would be set up soon.
7.6
Bernard referred back to the challenging timescale and the delay in
finalising the scope, vision and functions for the new agency. This
means that it will be difficult to identify which staff will transfer from
the Scottish Government. Staff are understandably worried and
need to see the key dates and milestones, eg advertisement for the
new Chief Executive; TUPE letters; structures, etc.
7.7
Kay added that there are also implications in terms of the planning
process which would normally be well underway by this stage in the
year.
7.2
LTS Progress Report
7.2.1 Board Members noted the report. The main points discussed
included:
i)
The LTS staff meeting on 17 and 21 December starts
the real engagement with Jamie Hume. LTS staff have
been positively disposed towards the new agency, but
to reassure staff they need to get information regarding
the functions, TUPE, pensions, etc. Jamie is also
meeting with Scottish Government staff
iii)
There are issues around Corporate Services and,
therefore, developing the shape the new agency before
1 July 2011 would be helpful.
7.2.2 Board Members agreed that the transition from LTS to the
new agency would, in itself, be challenging enough, but
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
8
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
Due Date
together with the budget cuts will make it very difficult for the
organisation. In addition, the political climate in the New Year
would only compound matters.
8.
Annual Planning 2011/12
8.1
9.
Alistair advised the Board that the process is not as far advanced as
it would be normally. It is difficult to plan as there is not yet complete
clarity on priorities. However, a further report will be made to the
Board in February.
Alistair
23.2.11
Chief Executive’s Report
9.1
Curriculum for Excellence, Assessment and Glow
The Board noted the report.
9.2
Learning and Technology
The Board noted the report..
9.3
Communities Team
9.3.1 Anne reported that the team is working hard to raise the
profile and working closely with CLD Managers and various
other partners. CLD has integrated well and the team is now
focused on taking forward the outcomes of the Communities
Team plan.
9.4
Review of Post-16 Education
9.4.1 Anne reported that LTS is working on a response to the
consultation which is due to be submitted on
17 December 2010. The meeting which was due to be held
was cancelled because of the snow. Once rescheduled, this
will give LTS the opportunity to meet other interested bodies.
Anne will provide a further update at the next Board meeting.
Anne
23.2.11
9.4.2 The Board requested that the LTS response is circulated to
Members prior to the next Board Meeting.
Catherine
Dec 2010
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
9
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
Due Date
9.4.3 Graeme commented that he had attended a meeting of the
Economic Forum and had noted a significant emphasis on
STEM subjects. This would be very relevant to the LTS
science team.
9.4.4 Bernard said that this was in line with the Board’s view that
LTS will need to prioritise what can be delivered. Graeme
signalled to Murray that STEM subjects is recognised within
the system and there is, therefore, a need for LTS to take
account of it.
9.4.5 On a related point, Jim reminded Board colleagues of
discussion at the last meeting about the financial investment
in NAR and how evaluation of its success would be
undertaken. Jim also questioned whether NAR should
continue to be a priority.
9.4.6 Bernard explained there is already a commitment to NAR
because of SQA and also the teacher population need the
resource. Louise added that NAR is part of capacity building
so that teachers themselves can develop knowledge and
expertise. The point about learning from their own experience
is important.
9.5
Mentoring
8.2.1
9.6
Kay advised the Board that LTS (in partnership with the New
Teacher Center in California) had been looking at peer
mentoring in the context of CfE. A research and
development pilot project has been set up and LTS will work
with the pilot participants to collect evidence of the impact of
peer mentoring on teaching and learning
Confucius Institute
9.6.1
Kay confirmed that, further to previous Board reports on this
topic, LTS has been awarded Confucius Institue status by
the Hanban. The formal recognition was confirmed in a
prestigious signing ceremony.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
10
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
9.6.2
10.
Due Date
LTS has also received very positive reports from the Tianjin
Education Commission and the Hanban. Kay recently
attended a World conference of Confucius Institutes in
Beijing where the Deputy Minister of Education praised LTS
in his concluding remarks.
Financial Authority Levels
10.1 Alistair reminded the Board that the Financial Authority Levels would
normally be reviewed and then agreed by the Board on an annual
basis. In view of the creation of SEQIA, views were sought from our
external auditors, Scott Moncrieff. Their advice is to leave the
current financial authority levels unchanged. Board Members
unanimously supported this course of action.
11.
Corporate Performance Report
11.1 Alistair drew attention to the following points regarding status:
i)
Targetted Support and Developing Global Citizens are both
Green.
ii)
Curriculum and Assessment and Emerging Technologies are
Amber – no anticipated impact on scope or plan.
iii)
Community Learning and Development is Red – issues have
been address and taken forward satisfactorily.
iv)
Technologies for Learning is Red – discussions with the
Scottish Government reached a successful conclusion.
11.2 In response to a query regarding Red residual risks, Alistair
explained that it was due to the difference between influence and
control.
12.
Advisory Council Update
12.1 Louise reported on the process that the Advisory Council has been
engaged in with LTS and other organisations. A seminar about what
matters in the change process had taken place with LTS staff and a
number of other seminars are planned with different bodies.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
11
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
12.2 At the last meeting Louise had advised the Board that the main topic
chosen by the Advisory Council was creativity. Members of the
group have now been identified and it will be chaired by Mary
Naismith. The Board will receive a further update at the next
meeting.
Action
Due Date
Louise
23.2.11
Louise
23.2.11
12.3 Louise reminded the Board about the ‘hot topics’ and confirmed that
there are now two hot topics: Partnerships with Academic and
Vocational Learning and Learning and Accountability.
12.4 The Advisory Council work programme is going ahead as planned
and the Board will receive a further update in due course.
13.
Items for Noting
13.1 Minute from OD Committee Meeting – 18 November 2010
13.1.1 Noted.
13.2 Audit Committee Meeting: 26 November 2010
13.2.1 Noted.
13.3 Finance Report – October 2010
13.3.1 Noted.
13.4 Media Updates – October and November 2010
13.3.1 Noted.
14.
AOB
14.1 None.
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
12
B.Mins.06/10
Minutes
Action
15.
Due Date
Date of Next Meeting
15.1 The next meeting will take place on Wednesday 23 February 2011
at 10.30am in the Board Room, Learning and Teaching Scotland,
Glasgow.
Approved by:
______________________________________
Graeme Ogilvy, Deputy Chair
Date: _________________
Approved by:
______________________________________
Alistair Gordon, Company Secretary
Date: _________________
Meeting of the Board of Directors
16 December 2010
13
B.Mins.06/10