Seòmar agus comataidhean

That would be helpful. Given that we are talking about essential further reforms, I was wondering whether that initial ambition had been realised.

I turn to another aspect of college regionalisation. We have Glasgow Kelvin College, Glasgow Clyde College and the City of Glasgow College, and my constituents go to and benefit from all three of those colleges, although the offers are slightly different at each college. We also have a regional board in Glasgow, which has a staffing budget of around £300,000 to £320,000 a year to run the board.

I had always thought that the colleges in Glasgow could have direct relationships with each other and that they could have the capacity to develop their own workstreams in relation to a strategic approach to courses within the city. Does Audit Scotland have any thoughts as to whether the structures in place after regionalisation are—I would not use the expression “fit for purpose”—appropriate in the current environment?

That is helpful. I will follow on from some of Willie Rennie’s comments on regionalisation. I shared some—not all—of his concerns, including that there could be centralisation. Glasgow Clyde College and, in my constituency, Glasgow Kelvin College, are anchor organisations and community-based colleges. I have praised City of Glasgow College but, such is its scale, it is more of a large, west of Scotland regional college. Many members of the Scottish Parliament would have concerns if we were to lose the community-based college aspects that Glasgow Clyde College and Glasgow Kelvin College offer. Has Audit Scotland looked at the strength of community-based colleges under the regionalisation model? I will turn to the finances in relation to that in a moment. First, has Audit Scotland looked at how the structures suit that community-based approach to college education? That is vital in my constituency.

I hope that you do not mind my raising that, but, as a Glasgow MSP who represents Maryhill and Springburn, I would be concerned if Glasgow lost three independent colleges. Although two of them are smaller in scale, they are absolutely grounded in the communities in which they are based and we would lose something if they went—that would not be efficiency, because we would be throwing something out.

The funding position of colleges is interesting. In 2019-20, there was a 2 per cent real-terms increase in the revenue funding of colleges and, in 2020-21, there was an additional £70 million, mainly in response to the impact of the Covid pandemic and to tackle the problems faced by students. I also got a bit confused over the undoubted financial challenge that still exists for colleges. A £54 million deficit is mentioned, which is predominantly due to pensions and other liabilities that sit there, but once that is stripped away, although colleges had been looking at a £9 million deficit for the past financial year, they are now saying that that has turned into a £3 million surplus.

I am sorry for throwing the numbers that you have reported on back at you, but I am looking at a 2 per cent real-terms increase, an additional £70 million for the year 2021-22 and your report of a financial position that is better than colleges thought that it would be, yet on the one hand there is a £54 million deficit, while on the other there is a £9 million surplus. When the Scottish budget is published, this committee has to consider whether the settlement for Scotland’s colleges is adequate, but those numbers do not really give us clarity on the financial position for Scotland’s colleges.

That is incredibly helpful. Thank you for taking the time—

Convener, I will try to keep it brief. I know that I have had a lot of air time. Rebecca Seidel’s explanation about stripping out some liabilities to get a more accurate, real-time assessment of colleges’ finances was helpful. As we scrutinise the budget, it is helpful to understand that there is an estimated £9 million surplus rather than a £54 million deficit.

Finally, I turn to attainment, which I have not yet mentioned. We know that attainment gaps exist in colleges as well. I am conscious that the fantastic Glasgow Kelvin College, in my constituency, has an attainment rate of 60 per cent and has strong positive destination outcomes. There are other colleges with higher attainment rates, but Glasgow Kelvin is top-heavy in terms of students who come from Scottish index of multiple deprivation 10 and SIMD 20 areas.

I see that the Scottish Government wants attainment levels to reach a target of 75 per cent over the next few years; attainment is currently at 66 per cent across Scotland. When Audit Scotland and others look at the outcomes for colleges and the attainment gaps, do they take into account the poverty-related attainment gap in Scotland’s communities as it presents in colleges? There might be a case for additional funding—perhaps a system of pupil equity funding—for colleges, in order to address that. Any comments on that would be helpful.

I will not come back in after this question, convener.

I welcome Jackie Baillie to the committee. I am pleased that you have been able to come along.

In your opening statement, you commented on the question that I wanted to ask. Who could disagree with the purpose of the cross-party group? However, I did not see anything about how people with lived experience of long Covid can help to shape, improve and enhance services and service provision in a positive and constructive way. I know that Long Covid Scotland wants to do that, but I did not see that reflected in the purpose of the group. It is up to the cross-party group to shape its work programme, but what you have put on the record gives me confidence that that will be a key part of the group’s objectives. I do not know whether you want to add anything to that.

I am sure that Mr Mountain and the minister do not look very different from how they looked 12 years ago—they looked old then, too. [Laughter.]

On the substantive question, Mr Mountain has made a reasonable point on consultation, as you have also done, minister. You mentioned that COSLA is consulted, as is the political parties panel. The next time that the Government consults both COSLA and the political parties panel, can they be reminded that they should be as extensive in their own consultation with councillors and party activists across the country? There is a joint responsibility—the job of consultation is not just for Government but is also for political parties and COSLA, and we need to hold to account appropriately each organisation that has that job of consultation, not just the Government. After the election, it would be good, when you have that discussion, if the Government reminded COSLA and political parties to have that consultation internally.

That was a really interesting line of questioning, but there is a general policy agreement across the Parliament. I know that some members did not support prisoner voting, but there is a clear majority for it. The policy intent is to ensure that the maximum number of prisoners who are entitled to vote can exercise that democratic right as part of their journey. The issue is about citizenship rights and responsibilities, and there is a broad agreement in the Parliament that that is what we should do. I wonder, minister, whether, after the next elections, you would review what difference sending polling cards to prisons rather than home addresses makes.

The underlying issue is that very few prisoners register to vote in the first place and, I suspect, very few eventually cast their vote. I suspect that the change is about encouraging more people in custody to exercise their democratic right. We want to make sure that the measure has had a positive effect. I am minded to support the statutory instrument, but, after the next election, I would be keen to see a review and analysis of the impact that the measure has had.

Good morning. I just want to take this opportunity of Rona Mackay’s appearance to ask a brief question that, I think, reflects a constituency interest. I know that alternatives to custody for women will be part of the group’s work. Frankly, we are failing too many women by locking them up. One of the new smaller custodial units for women is being developed in Maryhill, in my constituency, and we are all very keen to see what difference these establishments make in ensuring that women whose being held in such a unit is unavoidable still have access to their families and wider support mechanisms and are not cut off from that wider family group. As the new units come online over the course of this parliamentary session, will looking at their effectiveness or otherwise form part of the work of the cross-party group?

Thanks for coming along, Sarah. I know that it is a busy morning for you. I had not intended to ask a question, but I looked at the list of cross-party groups that have been approved. You mentioned the music sector, and that list includes a cross-party group on music. There is clearly room for it and your group to exist, but what might the relationship between them be? The CPG on music might consider a variety of matters that the cross-party group for which you seek approval might seek to consider. Would you consider partnership working or common themes? Do you have any thoughts on that?