Equality Impact Assessment for Continuing Professional Development (CPD) system in Tier 4 of Agricultural Reform Programme

Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill

Responses to the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee consultation on the Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Bill from stakeholders made a number of points about the CPD system. This included what CPD should and should not be and what a CPD system should look like. They noted the importance of accessibility to all persons using the system. They raised the point that there was a lot of anxiety about taking on training and learning activities and that not only did the farmer need support but so did the other members of his / her family and community. It was noted that advisors needed to have appropriate training. There was a need to know what would be counted as CPD.

Most of the responses to the consultation did not refer to issues of CPD in terms of protected characteristics. However, there were a number of references to issues of age (and particularly in regard to new entrants into the sector) and disability – especially dyslexia, which is generally considered to be at a higher level in agriculture than in other sectors.

Oral evidence collected by the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee on the Bill noted the importance of CPD and the character of the system that should be introduced. Evidence noted that:

• the demand for CPD varied across agriculture;
• new entrants were seen to be looking for training and short courses by comparison to other groups;
• a “lot of employers” did not have the funds to put young employees through the training that they required;
• there was a need to have regard to barriers to entry for women and new entrants;
• while there were grants for women in agriculture, these should also be extended to men, and there should be a young person agriculture grant;
• peer to peer learning and training was important for farmers and crofters learning from one another.

It was noted that Dyslexia Scotland had estimated that around 25 per cent of Scotland’s farmers suffer from dyslexia to one degree or another and that this needed to be factored into the design of CPD.

During the consideration of amendments on CPD in Stage 2 of the Bill, the Scottish Government introduced amendments to extend the different groups that could be brought within the scope of the CPD system and therefore ensure their inclusion. In discussion of the proposed amendments, it noted its intention to co-design the CPD system involving a wide range of stakeholders. This would help to consider and address matters such as the formats of CPD activities, scale and scope, and who might undertake CPD and in what circumstances. It noted that it would be important to consider affordability and availability of CPD activity as well as the need to monitor, evaluate and review what worked and what could be improved in a meaningful way. It also noted its aim to formally consult on the CPD regulations.

In Stage 3 of the Bill, amendments that were brought forward and accepted included ones that related to the inclusion of exemptions from undertaking CPD for persons in particular circumstances; recognition of the importance of peer-to-peer learning; the need for the Scottish Ministers to consult before making regulations relating to the CPD system and for monitoring and evaluation of the system.

There was also continued discussion on the need for affordability and accessibility of activities, including the cost to users. Importantly, this led to the inclusion of a requirement that CPD activities are to be undertaken only where it is appropriate and proportionate to do so.

The Scottish Government stated that it intended to create a CPD system that supported and empowered the individual to perform at their best without being unfair or unduly burdensome. It also noted that matters of affordability and accessibility would be considered as part and parcel of a BRIA and other impact assessments linked to the introduction of secondary legislation where appropriate.