Seòmar agus comataidhean

I would characterise that slightly differently. I think that the SFC should have the power to investigate issues that are reported to it. It will not always be the case that what is alleged will have occurred in its entirety. We need to be careful about that in some instances.

You make a fair point. The SFC, as the oversight body, ought to have powers and should be part of a structure so that, when there is an alleged issue in a college, that can be escalated and investigated and, if action is required, that action can be taken.

I return the question to you. Are you telling me that you would rather that we had not facilitated the closure of the deal?

Those that I have mentioned are the two that came to the fore in the discussions that we had with the universities. I have invited them to come up with any other ideas, and I invite the committee to do the same, if members have any thoughts in this area, because collective brain power is needed to find a way to build on the strong foundations that we have.

Widening access is incredibly important. Our latest task has been to look at why Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire have a local data-sharing arrangement, and to ask whether other local authorities could have something similar in place.

That could still be restrictive, because it might be that a local authority would share the data only with a local university: we want to go further than that. I have set out just some examples to give you a taste of what we are doing in this space to try to move the agenda on.

We will indeed.

We need to be a bit careful about the issue of reserves, because some of those moneys are not cash reserves. We must recognise that some will be earmarked for substantial investment in the universities, which will be incredibly important to Scotland and to the economy.

Also, in order to act in the best interests of their institution, universities have to have roughly 90 days’ worth of cash reserves available. It is easy to look at those numbers, total them up and make the point that you have just made—I recognise that point.

We should also acknowledge that our universities are doing a lot outwith the obvious. For example, many are going into schools to assist in encouraging young women to get into science, technology, engineering and maths subjects. That is just one example; there are a lot of outreach projects and the universities are doing a lot of things with their own resources to benefit us. Therefore, I am a bit hesitant to say, “Yeah, it is a rainy day—let’s spend these resources.” We would encourage universities to play their part in what needs to happen, but the situation is not as black and white as it might look.

The issue of trust in the machinery is at the heart of this. There is a lack of trust in the machinery and how it operates, and both sides will criticise each other about how each operates within it, but we have to get beyond that. For example, there is a recognition now that how the college employers’ side operates in the context of negotiations hinders the development of trust. In effect, those negotiators do not have a mandate to negotiate; they have to go back to the executive of College Employers Scotland and, ultimately, the principals’ group. There are also issues on the other side, which I think are recognised.

On the point of an independent chair, as I said earlier, that is still at a delicate stage. Some people accept the concept of an independent chair, but some people do not want an independent chair, although they would accept an independent facilitator. Some people might think that that is semantics, but the fact of the matter is that that distinction matters in this context. For example, if there were to be a facilitator or chair, what would their role be? What would their powers be? Once that has been agreed on, you can look for an individual who would be prepared to take on that role and would be acceptable to both sides. The Government cannot impose anything; this has to be done by agreement. I am optimistic that we can reach agreement on that, and I think that it would be helpful to have someone in that role, at least in the short to medium term.

It will be recurring. In our commitment to the employers, we recognise that it is not just one-off funding. It will be consolidated and included in the years to come as part of our settlement.

We will add that to the list of things to update the committee on.

Again, I will have to provide a follow-up update on that, if I may, convener. More than a year ago, the SFC suggested some additional powers that it felt it would benefit from having. I subsequently asked it to consider whether those would be entirely appropriate in the light of our approach to giving colleges and principals greater flexibility. You are absolutely right that some of the SFC’s powers are pretty blunt and out of date. If we are going to move into a space where we are empowering colleges and principals to deliver for their local economies and giving them a bit of freedom to do that, we need to be sure that the right governance is in place, whether it be on college boards or through the SFC.

One of the complications that we have had is the governance arrangements that have been in place for a number of years. The SFC has an additional tier of governance in between it and the colleges’ regional boards. As you are aware, we have a consultation running to address some of that.

There is no doubt that the SFC requires additional powers of intervention. You have cited fair work, but there are other areas to consider. I find it incongruous that the SFC requires to be consulted on voluntary redundancy schemes but not on compulsory redundancy schemes. That needs to be addressed. The power to compel institutions, principally colleges, to provide financial information that they do not have is also quite important.

I am not entirely sure whether I have seen a revised set of proposals, but I will check that and write to the committee. That will be part of the work that we are taking forward. As I said earlier, there must be checks and balances as we empower the colleges.

I would also like to see the SFC take a slightly different approach to some issues and, instead of taking a sector-wide response, to target its responses at a collection of colleges or at an individual college. I think that the SFC needs to get better and more surgical in its approach.

There has been, and continues to be, a dialogue with the SFC about the appropriate balance of powers and there is no doubt that its powers need to be revised.

I accept that.