Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am not aware of any colleges or universities that require specific assistance. It is important to recognise that these moneys were for transition purposes and not part of the core teaching funding settlement.

I am reluctant to get into some of the specifics of what we discussed with the colleges and universities, out of courtesy to them. However, there is a joint recognition of some the challenges that they face and, particularly in the case of colleges, there is a commitment to work together to try to find the additional flexibilities that colleges might want, as discussed in the committee report. Conversations are going on in that space. I am sure that the committee will wish to explore that further.

I would describe the discussions with colleges—notwithstanding the understandable upset that they had—as very constructive. I am confident that we can move forward from here and find a positive way forward. Our conversations with Universities Scotland have been more initial, but the cabinet secretary and I intend to build on those by engaging directly with the principals and chairs in what we hope will be a single gathering.

It is a fact. If we, collectively as a Parliament, welcome that, we have to recognise that if we spend money in that area, there will not be money for something else. That is the reality of Government. I am afraid that we cannot simply say that there is more money for this and more money for that, whether it be for education or something else, without consequences. Unfortunately, these are the consequences.

There is a future pressure there.

I can answer that. For 2023-24, the SFC administration budget is £7.784 million, which is comprised of £7.634 million resource and £0.15 million non-cash.

Mr Doris—

Our universities are in the fortunate position, which colleges are not, of holding reserves. That said, some universities are less well placed than others, and we are very much alive to that. However, no colleges have indicated to us that they are in a parlous state, as such. Were they to do so, we would clearly engage with them on that.

I go back to my earlier point about the substantial exercise that is under way to identify how we can better support the colleges through existing budgets. One of the things that I have found in my seven weeks in post is that the landscape is very congested with regard to who does what and how the moneys flow across the entire skills sector. I firmly believe that all of that can be rationalised to good effect to ensure that, as has been mentioned, more of the moneys are available for the front line. That is part of what we are looking at just now. We want to ensure that the maximum amount of moneys are going to the front line to deliver for learners—we are committed to looking at that.

The Erasmus situation—

Sorry—I was coughing.

I go back to what we talked about earlier. If the thrust of your point is that we should be putting more money into the college sector to address that issue, that is fine, but where does that money come from?

We have been very clear that we are in a regrettable financial position and cannot put more money into the colleges. I spoke to EIS-FELA last week and made it clear. If there is no more money available from Government and the colleges are to fund that pay increase—unions are perfectly entitled to look for a fair settlement from their employers—unfortunately, the only way to do that is through job losses and course cuts. I wish that it was not so.

Do you mean in the college sector?