Seòmar agus comataidhean

A whole bunch of stuff was raised in the opening comments, so it is tempting to go in 100 different directions to follow up the things that have been said. There are things that are easy to agree with because they are lovely principles, and then there is the reality. Here, we have the meeting of two things—nice words and lovely ideas, and then the reality of what many teachers are telling us is their daily experience in some of Scotland’s schools and classrooms.

I think that Carrie Lindsay hit the nail on the head. We do not actually know exactly what is happening in our classrooms, because there is such variation in reporting. We need at least to agree that there needs to be a common standard across Scotland for situations that arise in classrooms or schools to end up being reportable. At the moment, we are reduced to using anecdotal evidence in a lot of these discussions. I have certainly been told by quite a few teachers that they are positively discouraged from reporting some of the things that happen in their classrooms. They are told not to make a fuss about them even though, in some cases, people have been off work or even hospitalised.

I have not asked my question yet.

Are you saying that, in the scenario that I suggested, that individual, who has an address in Scotland and has been here for a few months, would not qualify?

I completely agree with Willie Rennie. The minister gave categorical assurances, but we will have to monitor the situation as it develops, because there are issues that might come back to us in due course.

You said that you are “confident just now”. I know that that is probably legal speak for not setting anything in concrete.

I have concerns about how this will be interpreted because of the terminology of “ordinarily resident”. For example, the Scottish Parliament information centre’s briefing for today’s meeting says:

“The Scottish Government expects someone who is ordinarily resident in Scotland to have made their home in Scotland with the intention of staying and living here”.

I feel that that is a huge open barn door. How will we test expectations and intentions? For example, someone could move here at Easter, do a job through spring and into summer—a summer job, basically—apply to go to a Scottish university, have an address in Scotland, be able to produce the necessary documentation to prove that they are resident there and then make an application. That is correct, is it not?

That is not going to happen.

Okay, fine. I appreciate the minister putting that on the record. I am sure that the minister understands why I am labouring the point, which is because of the nature of the cap, the number of places and the Scottish Government’s financial commitment to those places. I am obviously anxious that domiciled Scots should be able to take up those places. I hope that that is seen as the natural inclination that I would have, as a Scot.

I will be very brief. In relation to tuition fees, are you willing to consider Sir Peter Mathieson’s idea to allow domiciled Scots the opportunity if they are unable to obtain a place on a course at a Scottish institution—

The minister says that it is not captured by the regulations, but the criteria given in the minister’s letter are that someone must be

“ordinarily resident in the UK for three years”,

that they are

“ordinarily resident in Scotland on the relevant date”,

which is the date of commencement of the course, and that they

“Have been granted a form of leave”.

We absolutely want the friends who have joined us in Scotland for various reasons, most notably Ukrainians, to have access to higher and further education, but you are saying that nothing will have changed in respect of people from the rest of the United Kingdom, whereas, to me as a non-lawyer—it is important that I make that point—this reads as if there are ways to get round that.

Ah.