IT MIGHT be that Jock Tamson's future bairns will look back on the creation of the Curriculum for Excellence, with its associated new exams, as a great step forward in our education system.

There are some who say that's a bit like saying transport experts will one day look back at the fantastic network of trams running all over the capital as a great turning point in that city's history.

We are trapped in the perspective of the present, and from here there are some aspects that do not look good in our grand educational experiment to equip our young citizens not just with the skills they need for the world of today, but the ability to continue learning the skills they will will need in the future.

Last year the Scottish Qualifications Authority was forced to seek a £2 million bail-out to cover the cost of the National 4 and National 5 exams and this year has seen the new Highers come on stream. The SQA was given a further £14 million this year but still finds itself asking for yet another £5 million.

Small wonder that political critics are making hay, but they should be wary because the whole CfE project goes back deep into the heart of the time when Labour and the Liberal Democrats were in Government.

The real problem with the new curriculum has been two-fold. First it was envisaged, worthily, as creating a brave, bottom-up world of curriculum creation, giving creative whizz-kid teachers the chance to develop their own ideas.

But when it began to get to the crucial delivery phase the teachers who had welcomed this, in theory, began to demand additional support and above all, direction because so little had been given. "Grappling with mist" was the phrase of the day.

In other words, well-meaning bottom-up became top-down. When all of this resulted in teachers being unprepared Michael Russell became caught in the middle of an emerging political spat as Education Secretary trying to square the circle.

But in truth the main teaching union, the Educational Institute of Scotland, was right when it said that too much of the new system remained too vague on the eve of launch. The teachers were not ready, their support was not yet in place, there was a requirement for more training and all of this was had to be put in place under the maxim of better late than never.

The SQA demand for fresh help of £5m simply reflects the ongoing actions which need to be taken to service these legitimate needs. Of course, the concern remains that £2m last year and £5m this year might mean £10m next year, but this once our new exam system is bedded down these figure should fall.

A number of questions arise. Is it fair to call this a debacle? No. It was a legitimate and well-meaning reform to our education system, agreed across party lines, to prepare our young citizens to make them adaptable for an uncertain future. Paying a little extra to make it work is the right thing to do.