Amendments 27 to 30 moved—[Euan Robson]—and agreed to.

I remind members that if amendment 91 is agreed to, it will pre-empt amendments 2 and 31.

Amendment 91 moved—[Rhona Brankin]—and agreed to.

Amendment 3, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, has been debated with amendment 20. Are you moving amendment 3, Ms Hyslop?

Can you clarify whether amendment 3 is pre-empted by amendment 20?

It is not pre-empted.

Amendment 3 moved—[Fiona Hyslop].

The question is, that amendment 3 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

There will be a division.

Division number 12

For: Adam, Brian, Aitken, Bill, Baird, Shiona, Ballance, Chris, Ballard, Mark, Brocklebank, Mr Ted, Byrne, Ms Rosemary, Canavan, Dennis, Crawford, Bruce, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Frances, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Ewing, Fergus, Ewing, Mrs Margaret, Fabiani, Linda, Fergusson, Alex, Fox, Colin, Fraser, Murdo, Gallie, Phil, Gibson, Rob, Goldie, Miss Annabel, Grahame, Christine, Harper, Robin, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Johnstone, Alex, Kane, Rosie, Leckie, Carolyn, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Martin, Campbell, Marwick, Tricia, Mather, Jim, Matheson, Michael, Maxwell, Mr Stewart, McFee, Mr Bruce, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McLetchie, David, Milne, Mrs Nanette, Mitchell, Margaret, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Neil, Alex, Robison, Shona, Ruskell, Mr Mark, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, Eleanor, Scott, John, Stevenson, Stewart, Swinburne, John, Swinney, Mr John, Welsh, Mr Andrew
Against: Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Baker, Richard, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Butler, Bill, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Eadie, Helen, Ferguson, Patricia, Gillon, Karen, Glen, Marlyn, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Livingstone, Marilyn, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, Maclean, Kate, Macmillan, Maureen, Martin, Paul, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, John Farquhar, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Pringle, Mike, Purvis, Jeremy, Radcliffe, Nora, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mike, Scott, Tavish, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Margaret, Stephen, Nicol, Stone, Mr Jamie, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan

The result of the division is: For 53, Against 60, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 3 disagreed to.

Group 7 is on education authorities' duty to inform. Amendment 32, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 90, 53 and 55. If amendment 90 is agreed to, amendment 53 will be pre-empted.

Amendment 32 is a minor technical amendment to tidy up the bill to avoid duplication of the provision that it is intended to introduce with amendment 55. It will delete reference in section 9(9) to the form and manner in which an education authority will be required to give information to parents, young people and managers of independent and grant-aided schools.

Section 23A makes specific provision on information that is to be provided when authorities decide not to comply with requests. Amendment 55 is intended to add a provision on the form in which information is to be given to parents and young people. Amendment 55 provides that when an education authority communicates with parents or young people under the bill, they do so in writing. Alternatively, that communication may be in another form that is capable of some permanence, where that other form is appropriate, given the communication needs of the recipient. Therefore section 9(9)(g) is no longer required.

On amendment 53, I gave a commitment at stage 2 to consider the wording of an amendment lodged by Fiona Hyslop. I said at the time that I wanted to ensure that when a refusal of a request gives rise to a right of referral to the tribunals, that right is highlighted in any education authority response. The bill has been examined for any inconsistencies. Amendment 53 will plug the gap. Reference will be made in section 23A to section 4(2)(b), which refers to an education authority's refusal to consider a child or young person's requirement for a co-ordinated support plan.

I oppose amendment 90 on the ground that the bill already adequately covers the circumstances that can and cannot be referred to the tribunals. In addition, amendment 53 already addresses any inconsistency in the bill with regard to notification of rights of referral. I ask Adam Ingram not to move amendment 90.

I move amendment 32.

With amendment 90 I want to ensure that everyone who has the right to appeal to the tribunal after a legitimate request is refused is provided with the relevant information as to their rights to do so. I acknowledge that, by introducing amendment 53, the minister has responded to the natural justice arguments that Fiona Hyslop raised at stage 2, but in doing so he has limited the scope for referral to requesting the establishment or review of a CSP. We want to expand the scope for referrals to tribunals beyond those narrow parameters and I have lodged amendments to that effect that Parliament has yet to consider. Amendment 90 would not pre-empt that debate, but, by contrast, amendment 53 is too restrictive.

Amendment 32 agreed to.