Official Report 827KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19984, in the name of Douglas Ross, on behalf of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, on widening access to higher education. Members who wish to participate in the debate should press their request-to-speak buttons now, or as soon as possible.
15:00
I am pleased to open this debate on the committee’s inquiry into widening access to higher education. I thank all those who shared their knowledge and expertise with us, and I thank my committee colleagues for their diligent work on the issue.
In 2016, the commission on widening access recommended that, by 2021, 16 per cent of full-time first-degree university entrants should come from the 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds. The recommendation was that, by 2026, the figure should be 18 per cent, with an overall national target of 20 per cent by 2030. Scottish universities met the first interim target ahead of schedule in 2019-20. At least 16 per cent of full-time first-degree university entrants have come from the 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds ever since, although it must be noted that progress has stalled since 2020-21.
Back in 2016, the commission also recommended that, by 2021, students from the 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds should represent at least 10 per cent of full-time first-degree entrants to every individual Scottish university—I will speak more about that in a bit. The commission further suggested that there should be a review of that target in 2022, and that a higher target should be considered for subsequent years.
Our inquiry considered the progress that is being made on widening access, focusing on the following issues. What is needed for colleges and universities to meet the 2026 target? What access initiatives are showing success? Is the work of the Scottish Government and partners to introduce additional data measures progressing, and when and how will that be incorporated into targets? What access challenges exist for disabled, black and minority ethnic and care-experienced students outwith Scottish index of multiple deprivation 20 areas, and what might be done to address those challenges?
I will take a bit of time to consider the key findings of our report and some of the recommendations that we made to the Government. I have chosen to start specifically on the unique learner number. That is because we heard a lot of evidence about it, it takes up a big part of our inquiry report and there is a clear recommendation to the Government.
The original report by the commission on widening access in 2016 recommended the introduction of a unique learner number across all levels of education to track learners and share access data. I will repeat that point: almost a decade ago, the original commission recommended the introduction of a unique learner number. In his annual report in 2024, the current commissioner for fair access also recommended that each student have a unique learner number to help to monitor progress on widening access.
Robert Gordon University and Universities Scotland indicated their and the sector’s strong support for the use of a unique learner number. Universities Scotland stated that it would allow for an understanding of
“where a person has been in their educational journey”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 26 February 2025; c 37.]
and identification of their needs. The committee strongly agreed with the value of introducing a unique learner number to track students’ educational journeys and allow a better understanding of what works regarding transitions in the longer term.
I have heard the unique learner number described as a “bureaucratic nicety”. Does Douglas Ross agree that it is far from that and that it would be a fundamental cornerstone in data retention and understanding what is happening in our schools?
I agree with Martin Whitfield on that point, as does almost everyone who gave evidence to our committee. There was almost unanimous support, not just in the few weeks in which we took evidence, nor just in the written submissions, but going back year after year to the report from the original commission in 2016. Why, at the end of 2025, are we still calling for the introduction of a unique learner number? The committee was extremely disappointed in the apparent lack of progress and that the Scottish Government has said that a unique learner number will not be introduced in the short term or even in the medium term, despite that being recommended by the commission almost a decade ago.
The committee was also disappointed that the Scottish Government was unable to provide any indicative costs for the introduction of a unique learner number, or even to confirm whether legislation would be required. When the current minister’s predecessor appeared before the committee, he told us that he had viewed all the other evidence, in which a unique learner number had come up time and time again, but when questions were put to him about whether legislation was needed and how much it would cost, he had no idea. I felt that it was disrespectful to the committee for a minister not to have come prepared to answer on an issue that it was clear would come up.
Our report was agreed to unanimously by every party in the Parliament. I stress that there was no dissent on the report as a whole or on our recommendation on a unique learner number. We recommended that the Scottish Government should commit to the introduction of a unique learner number and outline how that would be achieved. Sadly, in its response, the Scottish Government said:
“Whilst we recognise the potential long-term benefits of a Unique Learner Number ... it is a wide-ranging issue requiring careful consideration”
because it is
“complex ... inherently cross-cutting in nature, and potentially involves sharing the personal, sensitive data of millions of individuals.”
We all know that. We know what the challenges are. We just want a solution.
It is only the Scottish Government that is preventing the adoption of a unique learner number. That is why I was encouraged by the fact that back-bench members of the Government party supported the recommendation, and I hope that the new minister and the Government listen not only to Opposition politicians but to the parties represented on our committee, whose unanimous view was that a unique learner number is needed.
There are a number of other issues that I want to focus on. We looked at the measures relating to the eligibility for, and the progress on, widening access initiatives. Currently, we use the Scottish index of multiple deprivation but, during the inquiry, the committee heard about the limitations on its ability to identify all the students who might need support. Although it is valuable and helpful at a national level, the SIMD is an area-based measure that does not capture individual circumstances. For example, it will not capture the circumstances of someone who is living in poverty in an otherwise affluent area.
Although the commissioner for fair access highlighted the continued need for a central measure of progress, he and many other witnesses advocated using a basket of indicators, including free school meals data, to help to identify individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds. The committee noted the usefulness of the SIMD as a widening access measure, but we recognised its limitations, particularly in relation to rural areas. We therefore recommended that the Scottish Government should work with stakeholders and the commissioner to introduce a basket of measures to identify person-centred characteristics for widening access measures.
I want to discuss free school meals data. The committee heard about the on-going work in relation to a pilot scheme in the north-east on the use of free school meals data, in addition to the SIMD, as a means of identifying students who are eligible for widening access measures. In its submission to the committee, Robert Gordon University said that the lack of legislation had made implementing data-sharing arrangements difficult.
Although we appreciate that there are potential barriers in relation to data sharing more widely, we urged the Scottish Government to look into the challenges and to confirm whether legislation was required to address them. The committee subsequently urged the Scottish Government to find a vehicle to allow for the necessary statutory measures, so we welcome the minister’s amendment at stage 2 of the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill, which seeks to address those barriers. We raised the issue in our report and, very quickly, the Government and the minister found a solution.
There are a number of other issues that I am sure that committee members and others will address. I want to finish on the subject of colleges. It is important to recognise the crucial role that colleges play in widening access to university, via articulation, for students from SIMD 20 backgrounds, disabled students, care-experienced students, black and minority ethnic students and adult learners. However, the committee also recognises the importance of college education in its own right.
During this parliamentary session, the committee has conducted an inquiry on colleges and, in recent years, has focused much of its pre-budget scrutiny on the sector. For a number of years, our committee has expressed concern about the financial sustainability of Scotland’s colleges and has made numerous recommendations to the Scottish Government on how those financial challenges should be addressed.
The committee is frustrated at the lack of change, or the urgency to make change, for the sector, and we share the concerns about the issues that colleges up and down the country are facing and about the serious and significant risk to the financial future of some of our colleges. Given the importance of the widening access agenda, the loss of colleges would not only affect the communities that they serve but undermine the drive to widen access to opportunities, including degree-level study nationally.
I am grateful for the time in the chamber today for our committee report to be fully debated and discussed. I look forward to hearing from committee colleagues and other members during the debate, and to hearing from the minister about the measures that the Scottish Government can take to ensure that access to education and institutions is widened. I commend our report.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the findings and recommendations in the Education, Children and Young People Committee’s 5th Report, 2025 (Session 6), Widening access to higher education inquiry (SP Paper 782).
Previous
Portfolio Question Time