Skills Strategy
Item 3 is evidence taking on "Skills for Scotland: A Lifelong Skills Strategy". We are pleased to have with us Fiona Hyslop, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning. Your predecessor this morning suggested that, because I could read his title, my glasses must be strong, which seems to be a topical issue in Parliament these days. After the cabinet secretary has made an opening statement, she will take questions from members.
Thank you, convener. This is my first appearance before the committee, and I welcome the opportunity to address it today on the Government's recent announcement on skills.
Since the skills for Scotland strategy was launched in mid-September, it has received significant widespread approval, particularly from industry representatives such as the CBI, the Scottish Chambers of Commerce and the FSB. The strategy focuses on three main elements: individual development; economic pull, addressing the skills and productivity agenda; and cohesive structures.
Since the launch, there have been a large number of stakeholder events involving ministers and officials. Napier University is holding an event on the skills strategy, and the CBI and the Scottish Chambers of Commerce are working together on it. Recently, the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council and UK Skills held an oversubscribed event that was attended by more than 300 people. On 24 October, a joint venture between the Scottish Government and the skills for business network was attended by more than 200 people, 150 of whom were employers, not just representatives.
We have also engaged proactively with sector skills council chief executives to discuss raising employer investment in skills and the role of sector skills councils in encouraging that. We have taken a leading role in developing strategic and productive relationships between sector skills councils and others, such as the Association of Scotland's Colleges. Recently, we brought together the skills for business network and the Association of Scotland's Colleges to discuss how they can work together better on the strategy. A further series of meetings with those organisations is lined up, including one in December, on the relationship between the sector skills councils and the ASC.
You have heard from my colleague John Swinney this morning about the reform of the enterprise networks. One of the priorities in the delivery of the coherent structure, which is a key focus of the strategy, is to bring together the relevant functions in the new skills body.
I assure the committee that local delivery and responding to local skills needs will be enhanced, not compromised, by there being one body focused on skills. I am determined that the new body will drive improvements in the local development of skills. Increasing coherence will benefit the learner and the employer.
I recognise that there will be significant upheaval for the staff involved. I put on record again that there will be no compulsory redundancies as a result of the reorganisation.
One of the new skills body's first priorities will be to bring everyone on board in a way that will maximise their contribution. We are working on the establishment of an interim board for the new skills body. I wish to announce to Parliament today, through this committee, some important developments. I have decided to use the Scottish UfI Trust Ltd, which is the holding company for the Scottish university for industry, as the vehicle for the formation of the new skills body.
I have asked Billy Allan to continue as chairman of the Scottish university for industry and to take on the additional responsibilities that are involved in establishing the new body. Mr Allan has experience of skills from his time as a board member and then chair of SUFI and from mergers and acquisitions in his business ventures. He will, therefore, be the interim chair during the establishment of the new skills body.
We shall add to the current SUFI board to help us through the transition process. The board, which will be made up of existing SUFI board members and additional appointments, will be the interim board of the new skills body. I have written to the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland about appointments to the interim board and she has approved the approach that I would like to take. That approach will make best use of individuals who have relevant experience and are already members of public body boards.
I am pleased also to announce that I have asked the following people to sit on the interim board: Barbara Duffner, who is a member of the Scottish Enterprise board and author of the careers service review; Janet Lowe, who is a member of the Scottish funding council and chair of its skills committee; and Willie Roe, who is chair of the Highlands and Islands Enterprise board. I have also extended the term of Bill Stevely, former principal of the Robert Gordon University and board member of learndirect Scotland.
I have appointed Donald Henderson, the former head of the teachers division in the schools directorate of the Scottish Government, to be the interim chief executive of the new skills body. I am determined that the new body will drive change in skills development. It is important that the Scottish Government takes responsibility for the change process. The Scottish Government will lead the programme to establish the new body and, with the assistance of Billy Allan and the interim board, it will drive forward change in skills development.
I hope that you appreciate my sharing that development with you. I look forward to taking questions on it and on other aspects of the skills strategy.
Thank you for making that announcement to the committee. Committees of the Parliament appreciate it when ministers take the opportunity to make announcements to them.
It was most remiss of me not to welcome the officials who are here with you.
Thank you, cabinet secretary. It was interesting to hear about those developments. What do you think would be the Government's appropriate response to its losing the vote in a recent parliamentary debate on the skills strategy?
I appreciate that it is important that we take on board the will of Parliament. On the occasion to which you refer, no decision was taken by Parliament, because none of the Opposition amendments was agreed to either. In the light of that, we have to drive forward the skills agenda, which is what we are doing. We are pleased with the response that we have had, particularly from business organisations, the Scottish Trades Union Congress and colleges. We have to acknowledge the contributions that were made during the debate, but we also have to respect the will of Parliament, which, on that occasion, was not to express a view.
In advancing the developments that you have described, will you engage with the Parliament, other parties and this committee to discuss the fact that none of the offerings that were on the table during the debate won a majority of votes?
It is disappointing that there is not a consensus in Parliament on the skills agenda, but we might not be as far apart as people think in some areas. I suspect, for example, that there is strong support across the parties for enhancing school-college links. We may differ on the form of such links, but I think that it is genuinely recognised that what we are trying to do is the right way forward.
On structure, for example, the Labour Party manifesto said that it wanted a full employment agency, while the Conservatives put forward a model that was similar to ours. The Liberal Democrats also had a similar model, although it perhaps did not include the skills and training aspects from Scottish Enterprise. There is a degree of consensus, which needs to be built on and developed.
One important difference between our skills strategy and what is happening south of the border is that our agenda very much has a lifelong learning aspect to it. The responsibility for skills development in schools is therefore critical. There are also the issues of early years development and cognitive skills such as team working and problem solving. All the soft skills that people recognise are needed are part of our agenda, which I think is shared across the Parliament. I hope that we can engage with this committee and the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee in developing the perspective and driving it forward.
I am sure that in a number of areas there is a shared perspective, for example on some of the concerns that have been raised. In devising your proposals, have you given thought to how we can engage more young people with science and technology subjects, which the evidence suggests have been taken up by fewer and fewer pupils and students in the recent past?
There is variation between what is happening with some engineering and technology courses and chemistry and physics courses, in which there has been a slight increase in students, which is to be welcomed, but you are correct on the wider point. It is not a matter of waiting until people are taking standard grades or highers—the issue must be addressed much earlier. That is why, as part of the curriculum for excellence, the science outcomes have been the first to be released in recent months. The modern languages outcomes have just been released too, but you are right that we must encourage young people and enthuse them about science.
A key aspect is engaging with employers and ensuring that teachers have the opportunity to have up-to-date experiences. Some of the developments will involve engaging with colleges, universities and employers. I am keen to encourage employer engagement with schools in ways that benefit pupils and teachers in science areas.
Will the new skills body have a specific remit to engage with employers on such matters?
Absolutely. At the conference that we held in October, employers were keen to recognise their role in providing opportunities for pupils to see the world of work. If we want to ensure that employers engage to upskill and invest in skills, it is not just a question of what employers do with people once they are employed. Employers have a duty and a responsibility to engage with schools and provide the opportunity for young people to see what the world of work is like.
That is a big issue for many young people. If we want to develop employability skills, we must have better engagement. We can all work together, and there must not be just a top-down approach. Much of the work is done on a school-by-school basis, and it is in different communities—that is where engagement with local authorities comes in. I know that the chambers of commerce are active in some areas of Scotland and that they are keen to develop school links.
On the business of learning and co-operation with work, I was struck by the comparisons that could be made with the successful dual system in Germany. At the age of 15, school kids go off into relatively low-paid employment, but in the next three years they get paid back through enhanced training.
One interesting point is that the system is organised on a federal basis rather than a Land basis—unlike the case with the universities—so that liaison occurs at the centre with all German industries. If there is liaison with Mercedes-Benz, it occurs at its headquarters. One sees problems with that in Britain, because the headquarters of so many British concerns are no longer in Britain. How can one have that degree of sophisticated technological exchange with firms that are based well away from this country and whose needs, alas, tend to be for fairly low-skilled employment in branch factories?
You have raised various issues. We have been approached by interested German ministers and people at different levels in Germany who want to find out what we are doing. There have been interesting exchanges on the skills agenda.
Engagement with trans-boundary employers presents challenges, which is why our relationship with the United Kingdom commission for employment and skills, which is being established, is important. We have co-operated in work on establishing and providing the chair of that body. I have had two meetings with David Lammy, who is the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Skills in the Westminster Government. We must ensure that there is a co-ordinated response. It is important not to lose the Scottish dimension on the sector skills councils, particularly when UK sector skills are involved. That is one of our biggest engagement challenges.
On engaging with remote employers on technology, we must remember that we have to compete on a more skilled basis. We have an interesting skills profile in Scotland. Proportionately, we have a higher skills level than elsewhere in the UK, but we also have a lower productivity level. That is our biggest challenge. Our profile means that we will have a different perspective from that of the UK Leitch review, which was more about upskilling to level 2. Our agenda must be more to do with skills utilisation and engaging employers. Many employers want to be involved, but we must make things easy for them. They are in the business of developing and improving products and ensuring that they are competitive in the marketplace. The Government's job, and the key role for the proposed new skills body and local authorities, is to ensure that there is an easy interface, so that employers can contribute on that agenda.
I played an ever-so-humble part in the Irish economic miracle, as my department in Germany, which taught British and Irish studies, hosted many Irish students in the 1990s. Those students went to Germany to work with Bosch and Mercedes-Benz. They trained, went back to Ireland and did amazing things. One reason why they had to go to Germany was that German was the language of much of the technology. They maintained their connections and got an overview of the regional economy through my operation, but they also learned a lot of technical German. In the field of wave technology, for example, it is fairly likely that the shop talk is no longer in English.
Perhaps we can advise the committee when the overdue visit by people from Germany to discuss the skills agenda will happen, as there may be an opportunity for more interaction involving committee members. I say that in the spirit of Lewis Macdonald's invitation to have more co-operation on the skills agenda.
Marilyn Livingstone is the committee's expert on skills.
I am pleased that the cabinet secretary is here, as the skills agenda is important to the committee. The committee has heard evidence inside and outside the Parliament on concerns about the division between the skills agenda and economic development. How will the cabinet secretary ensure that the skills agenda continues to be the economic driver that it has been, and that industry's training needs—whether at the degree, modern apprenticeship or workforce development level, which is important—are met? How will she ensure that, for example, the contributions of the trade unions—which have been significant in increasing the role of workplace development, especially for low-skilled workers—will continue? How will she ensure that the skills agenda continues to be linked to economic development?
It is important to remember that the Government's overarching purpose is to achieve sustainable economic growth. We have five strategic objectives, and every cabinet secretary is responsible for delivering on all of them. I have as much responsibility for delivering on the wealthier and fairer objectives as John Swinney has, and, like me, he is responsible for the smarter objective, so there is a shared agenda.
I have stressed that the skills strategy has three main drivers: first, economic development for the individual, which relates to the individual's progression; secondly, the economic pool, which is the productivity skills agenda; and thirdly, the need for coherent structures. Ensuring that our skills agenda responds to economic need is essential, not just for individuals but for the economy as a whole.
How we engage is critical. First, at UK level, we will engage via the UK commission for employment and skills, which is meant to be the voice for employers. The process of recruiting commissioners—who are being recruited from different countries—is on-going. Secondly, the sector skills councils are critical, although we know that they have varying degrees of performance. That is a big challenge.
Bringing the colleges together with the sector skills councils is essential. There are examples of that working extremely well, from which lessons can be learned. Local responsiveness means that the local delivery of economic development—involving colleges, local authorities and other local employers—will be critical. The new skills body will be charged with considering such aspects.
On workforce development, the trade unions have a vital role, especially in the areas of literacy and numeracy. The fact is that people who lack literacy and numeracy skills are five times more likely to be unemployed. That is a real problem area for us.
On the member's first point, about whether the separation of lifelong learning from enterprise presents challenges, the two areas are integral to how the Government operates. Within our overarching purpose of achieving sustainable economic growth, the main function for which I am responsible is as vital as any other.
Among our biggest challenges is not only 16 to 19-year-olds who are not in education, employment or training, but people who are perhaps older, are the second or third generation of unemployed and are removed from the workplace. Engaging with the skills and employability agenda is a big challenge. From talking to David Lammy, I know that he is trying to address exactly the same kinds of concerns. We agree with the Leitch review that bringing together employability and skills is vital.
One good aspect of establishing a single skills body is that it will be able to engage more effectively with Jobcentre Plus. I had a meeting with Caroline Flint, who is the UK Minister of State for Employment and Welfare Reform, on that issue. A key point is that, if we can bring together Jobcentre Plus and the skills agency to provide flexible local delivery of services, we can start to crack some of the employability agenda problems, such as how we engage older people in the world of work.
We know that people have concerns about Scottish Enterprise having responsibility for much of skills and training, because they believe that its main focus needs to be on business development rather than on the employability of those who are removed from the labour market. However, I believe that we will be able to address those two aspects properly and to best effect. That is the rationale for bringing them together.
Finally, we will support the trade union learning fund. However, I cannot make any announcements on that prior to the spending review.
I am sorry if that answer was rather extensive, but I had quite a lot of ground to cover.
I do not disagree with the point that has been made, but I am still concerned about how everything will work. As things start to pan out, it will be useful for our committee to see how the arrangements work in practice.
You talked a lot about further and higher education institutions. In my constituency and throughout Scotland, they have made a significant contribution not just to the skills agenda but to Scotland's economic development success. How will you ensure that the further and higher education institutions continue to grow in quantitative and qualitative terms? I have read all your announcements, but how will you ensure that such growth continues? The colleges are very significant to the skills agenda.
If you talk to the college principals, they will confirm that I have taken an active interest in the sector's role. As you will know, our recent announcement of £100 million for universities and colleges will help to drive forward the capital investment that the colleges need to ensure that they have good-quality facilities. When I opened Clydebank College recently, I was struck by the point that young women mechanics made to me, when they said that they had seen a significant change in the performance and attitude of other students because of the new facilities in which they now worked. Not only do students deserve new facilities, investment in such facilities can actually improve their performance and studying. That is essential.
Just the other week, I visited Lauder College—in which I know you have an interest—for the publication of the Government's response to the "Review of Scotland's Colleges". The involvement of the colleges will continue to be critical, and they are better placed than ever before.
Part of my responsibility is to provide a ministerial letter of guidance to the funding council, and one of the key aspects that I am discussing with it is the knowledge transfer agenda. That is not just about income generated from research; it is about the wider employer engagement that we talked about with Lewis Macdonald and how we can involve employers in research and knowledge transfer from colleges, which are more accessible to employers than universities are.
I visited Inverness College and found a real appetite there for engaging with local employers and the services that they can provide, which can lead to relationships that help to improve skills investment. The colleges are key to the knowledge transfer agenda, and I am actively involved with them on it.
I have a short supplementary question. You will be aware, as am I, that the issue of the equalisation of funding between the further and higher education sectors is always being raised. What are your views on the equalisation of funding? As you will know, I chair the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on construction. You will also know that the construction industry faces personnel shortages in key areas, such as planning—all members here know about those shortages. Do you plan to consider the amount of funding for areas that are short of trained personnel? Do you plan to incentivise any areas?
You might find that the equalisation of funding is an issue between colleges as well as between the college and university sectors. It is important to have parity of esteem within the college sector. I am addressing issues around governance and possible changes in charitable status that might provide colleges with the greater independence that universities have.
Parity of esteem is essential. We must move away from an agenda that compares vocational skills and academic skills. They are both valid sets of skills to which everybody should have access, albeit at different levels. We are moving towards that agenda, which is welcome. The involvement of colleges with universities is critical, for example in the education of school-based social workers through the two-plus-two courses that are available in different parts of the country. The articulation between colleges and universities is key to such engagement.
Because people who are already in work will do much of the skills development and we do not have a huge pool of young people, the ability of people to return to learning is critical. Obviously, local colleges can be far more accessible to women with young children, for example, compared with having to travel to a university in a city. That point is critical for rural Scotland in particular.
One reason for the recent development of the Crichton campus was to ensure that we had enough teachers for Dumfries and Galloway, because we knew that there was a shortage down there. The development of Crichton gave an opportunity to retain the University of Glasgow's presence there, but it did so in a creative way that ensured access to teaching courses down there. Initially, there are 80 places on the teacher training course.
You talked about the shortage of planners in the construction sector, but other areas have similar shortages.
It was just an example.
Any funding will depend on the Government's economic strategy, which John Swinney announced will be available shortly. The synergy and direction of all public agencies, whether the funding council, the new skills body, VisitScotland, Scottish Enterprise or Highlands and Islands Enterprise, will have to sit within that overarching economic strategy. The ministerial letter of guidance will be critical in ensuring that we shape funding for our university and college sectors in a way that is synergistic with our overarching purpose. That is part of my responsibility and I will ensure that it happens.
You mentioned the £100 million that you have made available for universities and colleges, which was a really good announcement. I am sure you are aware that the number of 16 to 19-year-olds in the Highlands and Islands is 16 per cent less than the Scottish average for that age group. HIE has estimated that that amounts to about 12,000 young people in that age group who are not in the Highlands but elsewhere. Many of those youngsters have gone elsewhere for education.
Given that the Highlands and Islands is one of the few areas of Scotland that does not have a fully fledged university, how can we ensure that the UHI Millennium Institute gets as much assistance as possible so that it gets full university status as soon as possible—I know that UHI is working hard towards that—to reverse the brain drain of young people and, indeed, to attract other youngsters into the Highlands and Islands? Young people are, by nature, the most productive, in every sense of the word, and we need to keep them in the Highlands and Islands to develop our economy. One of the reasons why our unemployment rate is so low in the Highlands and Islands is that all those youngsters have gone. If they had stayed in the Highlands and Islands, the unemployment rate would be considerably higher.
The second point that I would like the cabinet secretary to address is the fact that part-time students do not get the same funding as full timers. The fees of people who do a part-time course are not paid, whereas the fees of those who do a full-time course are paid. How can equality be achieved between full-time students and part-time students? Lots of the students in the UHI network are part timers.
In recent months, I have visited UHI, Inverness College and Lews Castle College, where there are great and exciting opportunities. I recognise your economic analysis in relation to ensuring that young people stay and do not just leave. We talk about sustainable economic growth but this is as much about having sustainable local economies throughout Scotland. I hope that my early actions have communicated my commitment to that. It is essential that we give any support that we can so that UHI gets university status. We must recognise that the process on which UHI is embarked requires independent quality assessment, although that will happen.
The research aspect of university status for UHI is interesting. UHI has been well supported by other universities, and by Lews Castle College in particular, in relation to some of the fantastic sustainable environmental work that they are doing. That shows that there is support from elsewhere. I have communicated to all university principals that collaboration—cross-institutional working—is essential for Scotland. However, the biggest challenges that they face are demography and geography. That refers back to Dave Thompson's comments about part-time students, to whom Marilyn Livingstone also alluded. We need to ensure that we have a funding system that provides some parity. The issue is covered in the skills strategy and is very much on my agenda, although I cannot say anything in advance of the spending review.
The type of learning that is going on in the Highlands and Islands has attractions that provide a lesson for other parts of the country. UHI might be behind because it does not have university status, but institutions in other parts of the country are having to develop the type of learning that it offers—the co-operative, collaborative approach, involving use of the internet, that it has had to develop out of necessity. UHI might be behind now, but I suspect that in the not-too-distant future it may be ahead of the game.
There is still a great demand for building skills in the north of Scotland and, I am sure, in the rest of Scotland. At one point, there was a great demand by students for places in the UHI's building section. However, due to the way in which the funding system applies to colleges and universities, the college could not get funding for those students, although it was forced to take them on, which gave it a financial problem. It had to have the students in place for a year or two before it could convince the funding people that it needed funding for them. Have you considered that situation?
Responsiveness to student numbers is really an issue for the funding council. However, I recognise that, in areas in which there is population growth—such as Inverness, West Lothian and other parts of the Lothians—the consequences can take some time to filter through. Again, that is an issue for the funding council, but part of its response is that our biggest challenges are demography and geography.
Interestingly, Inverness College is trying to provide more flexibility in its courses. That goes back to the key drivers in skills development: individual development and progression. During the summer months, construction and tourism are big economic drivers in the Highlands and Islands. How do we provide more flexible courses—perhaps more extensive courses that last for longer—in the winter months, when the dark, dismal days mean that there may not be as much productive work in construction or tourism? Such adaptability and flexibility by colleges are important, and Inverness College is considering that approach.
On Dave Thompson's first question, I know that members will find it hard to believe, but I was young once. For many Shetlanders—the same is true of people from Stornoway and other parts of the Highlands, as Dave and I have been discussing—being able to go away is important. I would never want a policy that prevented kids from seeing Glasgow, Edinburgh or Suffolk—wherever they want to go—as an essential part of the educational mix. I know that that is not what the cabinet secretary is saying, but it is important to bear that in mind.
There are also opportunities outside Scotland—we underperform in international study and in participation in Erasmus. The message is: go, see the world, but perhaps come back.
Have you set any targets to increase the number of modern apprenticeships?
No. There has been some concern about the setting of targets for different training schemes. Microsoft kindly hosted a business breakfast that addressed the skills strategy, and the message that came from everybody around the table was, "Please don't get fixated on numbers and targets." We might hit targets but not necessarily have the right impact for individuals or the economy.
We want to sustain modern apprenticeships and to expand into level 2 where there is a gap in the market. We do not want to displace level 3 modern apprenticeships in areas in which they already exist. We want to ensure that we maintain the number of training places. We think that when we combine the different skills and training agendas, we will be looking at about 50,000 young people, particularly in training positions. I will not drive the strategy by setting targets. It has been recognised that that is a successful way to go.
I have a concern about modern apprenticeships. Colleges say that they have the majority of modern apprenticeships, but local authorities say that they have the majority. Then I hear that private providers have the majority. I think that everyone is double counting provision. Rather than have that agenda, it is important that we focus the apprenticeships on those who need them and ensure that employers have access to and engage with colleges on delivery. We are not fixating on targets; we want outputs and outcomes.
As I have said before, our biggest challenge in Scotland is productivity. Improving productivity—skills utilisation in the workplace—will be a key determinant in driving success for the economy.
You mentioned the important role of employers in providing training. Do you recognise the STUC figure that 60 per cent of employers do not invest in training and skills, and do you have any proposals to incentivise employers, particularly small employers? Let me give you one quick example. During the election campaign, I met a guy who runs a gas installation business. He always takes on an apprentice, but he made the point that he should actually be paid to do that because it costs him money.
The whole agenda of employer engagement in skills is critical, which is why I am pleased about the response from employer organisations. The biggest challenge in Scotland faces small to medium-sized enterprises, and small businesses in particular. The question goes back to what the Government can do to make a difference, and engagement is particularly important.
We also need to consider how we can liaise with the UK agenda, and we are currently debating what we mean by incentivisation and what shape it will take. There are obviously some limits to what we can do because of the distinction between devolved and reserved powers in this area.
David Lammy, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Skills, originally wanted to consult on a facility to levy employers, if there was agreement in the sector to have such a levy, as part of legislation was announced in the Queen's speech. The UK Government decided to withdraw from that agenda but to engage in it perhaps in a year's time. It is not an immediate issue, but it is certainly something that we have to think about. I am reluctant to give employers any extra financial burdens but, as I have said, we should be open-minded. I gave the Scottish Government's approval for engagement in such a consultation, although we would not be bound by its results. We want to liaise on that.
Some incentivisation can be tailored to local delivery. I visited the workright project in Leith, in which small businesses engage with housing associations. They are given some financial support that they can give to youngsters, who get about £90 a week, some of which is paid for through the get ready for work funding. That can make a huge difference, particularly for young men, because of the role model aspect. Such apprenticeships are not just about work but about lifestyle, including responsibility, employability and the soft skills that people need.
People at the workright project raised with me a concern about how we can introduce workplace assessments rather than make people always go to college for assessment. We talk about making things easier for employers. Some of that assistance might be financial—although we are within the constraints of the UK settlement for some of the programmes—some might be practical, such as having workplace assessments, and some might involve bureaucracy, such as personnel issues and form filling, and making that work easier, which I know was one of the things that helped the workright project.
Incentivisation can mean different things. If you are asking whether employers can get VAT reductions for training, it is obvious that I cannot deliver that within the current settlement. However, we can try to produce other mechanisms that will make things easier for employers—particularly small employers—to engage with schools, take on apprentices, in whom I understand that you are particularly interested, and engage with those in the 16 to 19-year-old age group.
The committee will consider tourism and the skills that are required in the tourism industry in an inquiry. Dave Thompson mentioned Inverness College. I was stunned that only two people had signed up for that college's tourism course or its catering course—I cannot remember which. There were not enough people for the course to run, although we know that there must be demand for workers with such skills in the tourism industry in the Highlands.
In considering your strategy, have you thought about targeting that demand, encouraging people to think about working in industries such as the tourism industry and making the industry much more attractive to work in? Have you thought about setting up a centre of excellence for hospitality and catering courses, for example? It seems to me that every FE college runs hospitality and catering courses and media studies courses of differing quality. Scotland is a small country; it has only 5 million people. One centre of excellence for one set of skills should be considered.
I will be interested in how your tourism inquiry progresses.
You mentioned Inverness College. One of the interesting things that I heard about when I visited that college was the demand on the skills for work programme, particularly from young, enthusiastic people. Employers like such qualifications—I know that the construction industry, for example, likes them. The pilot is now being rolled out. The programme has been a success in attracting young people into industry and giving people experiences in schools that could—I hope—influence later decisions.
A centre of excellence might not necessarily be in Edinburgh—do we really want young people from the Highlands and Islands to have to come all the way down here to a centre of excellence? The mapping of local college courses, which happens in the Lothians, is important. Colleges map their curriculums, with different colleges focusing on different things. That could happen on a regional basis.
One challenge is that although there is great demand for people to work in areas such as tourism, should people have to study to be able to work in those areas? That is where employer engagement comes in. When a person goes to college, they give up their income. There are plenty of jobs in tourism, and one of the biggest challenges in that industry concerns the extent to which employers can release people. The committee might want to consider that matter in its inquiry. Perhaps Inverness College's approach could be considered one of the creative ways of producing what is wanted for people who are released outside the summer months.
There have been employer-led developments. I think that David Whitton has referred in the chamber to developments in the construction industry in Glasgow, for example, and I know about developments in the oil and gas industries in Aberdeen. Employer-led facilities are important. In that context, one of Scotland's strengths is the Scottish credit and qualifications framework, which is essential and differentiates what happens in Scotland from what happens down south. We can ensure that anybody who is involved in developing their skills is placed within the framework. Employer engagement with and understanding of the Scottish credit and qualifications framework are critical.
What you have said is useful, cabinet secretary, and I am sure that we will want to return to issues that have been raised, particularly as we will be considering tourism, as David Whitton mentioned. Skills will clearly form a big part of that consideration. Thank you for coming to the meeting and making the announcements that you have made.
There will now be a two-minute break.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—