Seòmar agus comataidhean

Sorry to interrupt, Deputy First Minister. I suspect that I will strongly agree with what you are going to say. My question, if I have not been clear, was, given the scale of the estate that you have outlined, do you have a worked-up programme in the Government to address that issue? I think that we are all agreed on the scale of the challenge and on the benefits therein. I fully understand your position, but there is a need to move to having something substantive—to have at least a framework—to operate to.

I accept your point, convener. I raised the pupil teacher ratio more as an example than as a specific point. I accept that it will be dealt with later.

Good morning, panel. Thank you for attending. I want to start with a quick question about the Verity house agreement. We know that some broad principles have been established, but, critically, we still need to work out the principles, never mind the details, of any fiscal framework.

Therefore, my question is, what consideration have you given to how the Verity house agreement will change your approach to setting the budget, giving advice to local authorities about budget setting and, indeed, policy making in terms of funding, ring fenced or otherwise?

I hear what you are saying and I accept all of that. You talk about accountability on both sides, and I think that the principles are clear. However, the budget for 2023-24 will be published fairly soon, in December, and local authorities will be asking what specifically it will mean for them in the following year. Have you managed to have any discussions yet with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance about what the interim measures will be? I acknowledge that you said that it will be an iterative process, and I am thinking specifically about local authorities that might wish to, for example, revert to using the more flexible pupil teacher ratio instead of going by the number of teachers and that will, therefore, be making specific budgetary plans based on that, because that is a longer-term issue. I am trying to flesh out how far they will be able to make those decisions straight after the budget, as I am not clear about that.

After Mr Dey’s indication that he would be looking for administrative savings from the Scottish Funding Council, can you tell us what substantive progress has been made on that thus far? In other words, what sums are you going to put on the table, and where will they come from? Failing that, you could just write back to the committee.

I will move on. Given the increasing talk about the Scottish education exchange programme—and again this is a general question—what sense do you have of the budgetary requirements in that respect? Moreover, with the considerable financial challenges that I agree we face at the moment, how will the money for that be found in what is a very constrained environment?

Thank you, convener.

It is me again, cabinet secretary. In the evidence session that the committee had on 17 May, which I appreciate was a while ago, the minister for HE and further education, Graeme Dey, confirmed that work was being done on potential savings from the Scottish Funding Council’s administration costs. I have just a quick question: do you have any update on progress on that? If savings have been identified, are they coming from elsewhere in the portfolio? Can you give us further information on that?

Just to finish this off, can you tell us what timescales you are working to?

I agree. Thank you.

I appreciate that it is a big area, and you are also coming off the back of questions that I myself asked of SNIB when I was a member of the Economy and Fair Work Committee.

I want to bring in Sandy Begbie and Louise Maclean to reflect on the focus on women in their sectors. I am aware that you have done a lot of work, and your statistics are different, but I would like to hear your reflections about entrepreneurialism, on the sum of money that we have mentioned and about the particular challenges for women in your sectors.