Seòmar agus comataidhean

Councillor Hagmann came to Parliament on 16 January and said:

“There were surprises in the budget. One of the lines that we were working on was that there would be no surprises, but that has not been the case.”—[Official Report, Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee, 16 January 2024; c 7.]

You are talking about the basis on which local government had made demands, but you had an agreement with them. This was meant to be a different year, given the Verity house agreement, but that has really just been ditched, has it not?

So, no.

That is not what the college sector is telling me.

Earlier, you gave some answers about council tax and the money that is being baselined into the budget for next year. Senior councillors across Scotland are telling me that their financial officers are telling them not to believe you. Is it a problem that trust has collapsed so much that people who are setting their budgets are having to make those assumptions?

I will move on. Do you now know what the budget for further education is?

Okay.

Obviously, the flexible workforce development fund is of huge concern to colleges and employers. Since you were last here, there has been an awful lot of coverage about it, and we have had people asking about it, too. What is your justification for cutting that area in preference to other areas?

Moving on to higher education, I note that, since you published the budget, we have had the admission figures for international postgraduate students across Scotland, which show a very significant decline in big parts of that market. What impact is that going to have on the budgets of our higher education institutions?

I am not sure that that is how it works, though.

No—what happens is that ministers indicate what the cap is on the number of students who could be admitted. That is a ministerial decision—ministers speak to the Scottish Funding Council about it and a letter is sent. That is the issue of the number of students. As far as I am aware, the SFC is waiting for an instruction from ministers as to whether there will be less money per student or fewer students. Do we know whether ministers have given that instruction to the SFC? The issue is not a matter of negotiation with the universities; it is one for ministers and the SFC, which works for the ministers.

Yes—absolutely. Wherever the evidence was given to Parliament, the issues about financial sustainability are still very relevant. The final example is that Kevin Northcott from Rossie Young People’s Trust said:

“Approximately 50 per cent of our current cohort of young people ... are cross-border placements.”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 29 March 2023; c 11.]

Minister, in your wish to reduce the number of cross-border placements, the prevailing trend seems to be to do so to as close to zero as possible. That adds significant questions about the financial sustainability of that incredibly important sector.

I presume that, in the circumstances, our concern is not about the provision of the service for children in Scotland and from Scotland. The policy trajectory of removing—as much as possible—English young people from the system will result in institutions not being able to continue to operate. That should be a significant concern in relation to the policy direction that we are taking. I would appreciate any clarification from the minister on what she is going to do about the sector’s financial sustainability if her policy trajectory is to be adopted.