Official Report 1154KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19253, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on backing Scotland’s colleges and apprenticeships. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons. I call Murdo Fraser to speak to and move the motion.
16:02
Conservatives in Scotland believe that economic growth has to be the first priority of Government. That need has never been more urgent than now.
The quarterly economic indicator survey published today by Scottish Chambers and the Fraser of Allander Institute contains some stark messages. In four out of five main business sectors, there has been a sharp decline in confidence, with manufacturing and construction—two of the most important sectors to the Scottish economy—being the hardest hit, and 72 per cent of Scottish businesses are now concerned about their tax burden. Against that backdrop, seeing this Government place a greater focus on economic growth is essential.
Is it not interesting that, today, the Scottish National Party wants to talk about independence—the only thing that it cares about? However, Scottish Conservatives are on the side of the people, and talking about their priority, which is growing the economy and dealing with household bills.
When it comes to taking spending decisions on the extensive resources that are under the control of the Scottish Government, there needs to be a focus on expenditure that will actively contribute towards growing our economy. Against that backdrop, the report on Scotland’s colleges, which Audit Scotland published on Friday, contained some stark and concerning messages. It follows on from equally stark messages in the Scottish Funding Council report issued just a few days beforehand, which warned that some colleges face insolvency in the current financial year—they face actual insolvency, under this SNP Government.
According to Audit Scotland, college funding has suffered from a 20 per cent real-terms cut in spending over the past five years. We see the consequences of that on every campus in Scotland. The Audit Scotland report states that the college sector workforce contracted by some 8 per cent in the year 2023-24 alone.
In the region that I represent, all the colleges are impacted. Fife College is expressing concern about the availability of future courses. UHI Perth had to save some £4 million by the middle of the year. It has already had to close the campus nursery, while also contemplating staff redundancies and cutting what it calls “unviable courses”. It has even discussed cutting degree courses entirely.
Lastly, Forth Valley College is proposing to close its popular and busy Alloa campus, meaning that any Clackmannanshire students would have to travel to Stirling for further education, leaving a substantial black hole in the centre of the town and the centre of the county. That is bad news for staff, bad news for students and bad news for the local economy.
Colleges are fantastic institutions, as you have said. They are the skills engine for the Scottish economy. You have rightly identified the issues that are happening in Forth Valley College and Alloa. It is up to the Scottish Government to do more to retain students, maintain skills and secure facilities. That is what we fundamentally believe.
Always speak through the chair.
Alexander Stewart is absolutely right to point the finger at the Scottish Government.
The Scottish Government cannot blame the situation on Westminster or an overall lack of resource. Over the past five years, during which college payments have reduced by 20 per cent in real terms, the overall Scottish Government budget has had a real-terms increase of 2.5 per cent. The closures and cutbacks are entirely down to the choices that the SNP has made to deprioritise skills training for the future workforce that our colleges provide.
Some, but not all, apprenticeships are delivered through our colleges; yet, already, there are concerns about the shortage of apprenticeship places. In 2024-25, learning providers requested around 34,000 apprenticeships to meet the needs of the economy, but the Scottish Government funded just over 25,000, which left a substantial gap. The trade body Engineering Scotland has estimated that 20 per cent of the skills demand from employers has been unmet due to those real-terms cuts in apprenticeship spending, and, elsewhere, businesses have expressed concern about the growing skills gap. The Open University report “Business Barometer 2025” states that 56 per cent of Scottish businesses are experiencing skills shortages, while 39 per cent expect the skills gap to worsen in the next five years.
To give an example from another sector, the number of extra construction workers that are needed in Scotland for the period from 2025 to 2029 is estimated at 3,590 per year, yet we simply do not have the apprenticeship places available to provide the training to meet that demand. In the words of Michelle Ferguson, director of the Confederation of British Industry Scotland,
“Scottish Apprenticeships will be critical in building the future workforce”,
but we are simply not providing enough of them.
There has been some encouraging language from the Scottish Government about the need to promote parity of esteem between different learning routes. Apprenticeships are of value to our future economy, as are university degrees, but apprenticeships get much less attention and much lower funding—as do college places; figures from the Funding Council show that, for the 2024-25 financial year, funding per college student is just £5,054, while the equivalent per university student is £7,558, which is nearly half as much again.
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes, if I have time.
There is really not very much time in hand. It is up to the member.
I will take a brief intervention.
It is on a point of agreement, I think. The member will recall that the Economy and Fair Work Committee heard evidence that apprenticeship and other college students have a much higher rate than university students of working in the field for which they have studied. There is something to be said for the success of apprenticeships and college places in producing people who are able to work in the field for which they study.
I absolutely agree with Lorna Slater’s point about the importance of apprenticeships in delivering skills for the future.
The SNP’s response is to mess around with quangos, transferring responsibility for apprenticeships and national programmes from Skills Development Scotland to the Scottish Funding Council. It is hard to find any stakeholder who believes that that is the right move at the present time, and the transfer is likely to consume precious resources that could be spent elsewhere.
We need a restoration of funding to our colleges and apprenticeships, because they are vital to the economy of the future. They deserve investment, not cuts. That is what my motion calls for.
I move,
That the Parliament recognises that future economic growth is reliant on providing the right opportunities to create good jobs that allow businesses to expand; notes with concern the findings of the recent Audit Scotland report, highlighting a 20% real-terms cut in funding to the college sector over the past five years, and believes that this has a negative impact on the economy and limits opportunities for young people to get ahead; acknowledges the concern from business representative groups about the future of apprenticeships, and the harm that a restriction in apprenticeship numbers causes to job creation in Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to restore funding to Scotland’s colleges and raise the number of modern apprenticeship places from 25,507 in 2024-25 to at least the 34,000 identified by Skills Development Scotland as necessary to meet Scottish economic growth ambitions.
I call Richard Lochhead to speak to and move S6M-19253.3. Minister, you have up to five minutes.
I apologise—I meant to call Ben Macpherson. You still have up to five minutes, minister.
16:10
My colleagues and I welcome today’s debate, which is on matters that are important to all of us as we represent our constituents. We also welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion and restate the Scottish Government’s strong commitment to supporting our people to fulfil their potential and to tackling the skills shortages in our economy.
We are focused on building a fair, prosperous and successful economy, which is supported by an education and skills system that is flexible and ready to meet the needs of people, communities and employers. We know that Scotland’s future success depends on creating good jobs and making sure that people have the right opportunities and skills to access them.
As Murdo Fraser said, it is encouraging to hear that from the minister. However, how does he square those words with the 20 per cent real-terms cut in the budget for colleges?
I will come on to the specifics in due course, but, in response to Ms Smith, and in general terms, I emphasise that our colleges, employers, universities and trading providers are key to helping people to gain the skills that they need. Collectively, we members of the Scottish Government greatly value their contribution, especially in delivering a record number of apprenticeships and in helping so many school leavers to move on to positive destinations.
Our amendment sets out our record on young people and others achieving positive destinations, as well as the significant investment that has been made this financial year. It also states that we note the terms of the Audit Scotland report. We know that there is more work to do. We are committed to a new national approach to skills planning, which will be led by the Scottish Government. Its aim will be to better align post-school education and training pathways with Scotland’s long-term skills needs, especially in key sectors of our economy that support the move to net zero.
We are working closely with the Scottish Funding Council and Skills Development Scotland to take that forward. Together, we have agreed a model for skills planning that we will shape through engagement with colleges, universities, employers and regional partners. That collaborative approach means that we can move quickly and make real progress. We are also working with regional economic partnerships, which are really important, to build on what is already working well and to strengthen regional skills planning.
Our goal is to empower regions to deliver on their economic and social ambitions while contributing to national priorities. We want the post-school system to be more responsive to regional needs, and we are building on the strong foundations that have been set through the Scottish Funding Council’s regional tertiary pathfinders programme, along with other local initiatives.
However, there are limits to what we can do on our own. We do not operate in a bubble. The impact of Brexit and the United Kingdom Government’s migration system has undoubtedly added to labour market pressures—that is a fact—and we continue to make the case for a more flexible and responsive approach to migration that reflects Scotland’s specific needs.
Does the minister accept any responsibility at all for the state of Scotland’s colleges?
The Scottish Government is proud to work alongside Scotland’s colleges on how they are delivering as anchor institutions in our communities. Yesterday, I visited Glasgow Kelvin College in Pam Duncan-Glancy’s region, and I was hugely impressed by everyone with whom I engaged there. In my role I am committed to having positive, constructive and proactive engagement with our college sector, and I am proud to have done that in the days in which I have been in post so far.
Although, as I have mentioned, tackling certain pressures is out of our hands, we are not standing still. We are taking responsibility and making progress. We know that transformation takes time, and we accept that action is needed now to address the skills gaps that constrain parts of our economy from fulfilling their full potential. That is why, alongside our long-term reform, we are continuing to invest in sectors that are important to Scotland’s economic future, including offshore wind, social care, engineering and advanced manufacturing.
Building on that commitment, we have agreed with the Energy Skills Partnership a new grant to deliver a college-led offshore wind skills programme, backed by up to £3 million in 2025-26. There is more that I could say on that, but my ministerial colleague might touch on it in his closing speech on behalf of the Government.
As I close my own speech on behalf of the Government in this important debate, I say that, by working together as a Parliament, we can create more opportunities for our people, strengthen our regions and power Scotland’s future economy. We welcome this opportunity to discuss those really important matters in the chamber.
I move amendment S6M-19253.3, to leave out from “with concern” to end and insert:
“the Audit Scotland report entitled, Scotland’s colleges 2025, and the importance of continued investment in Scotland’s colleges and skills system to support inclusive economic success, prosperity and job creation, including provision of around three quarters of a billion pounds in Scotland’s colleges in 2025-26, and an additional £3.5 million for skills, through the Scottish Budget; acknowledges that this is particularly important in the thriving sectors, like those critical to realising the transition to net zero, and the shared opportunities of this; recognises the key role that colleges, employers and training providers have played in ensuring that 93% of school leavers have a positive destination, and providing apprenticeships and training to a record 39,000 individuals, and notes, however, concern about the impact of Brexit and the UK Government's migration system, which is contributing to key skills gaps and labour market shortages.”
16:15
We can all agree on the vital importance of skills and training. We know that the ability to obtain them substantially determines a person’s opportunities in life and, collectively, the success and dynamism of our economy. What we are debating is how best to use public funds and resources to support skills and training. There is no doubt that, in times of constrained public spending, more money cannot be the only answer. We need to properly explore the art of the possible and how to make the most impact with the resources that are available.
Is Lorna Slater ashamed that the Government that she was a member of received £875 million, raised from Scottish employers through HM Revenue and Customs for the apprenticeship levy—while, during that same period, only £700 million was actually spent on apprenticeships in Scotland? Where did that money go?
I share Craig Hoy’s frustration with the lack of transparency around how apprenticeship levy funds are handled. However, he should note that those funds are not kept ring fenced in any way and end up as part of the block grant to the Scottish Government, so they must be accounted for in the budget. Of course we all understand the budget constraints that the Scottish Government is under, but I understand the member’s frustration.
I have been encouraged by the current impetus for increasing and improving workplace learning. I certainly felt that I learned more in the years that I spent working for engineering firms, as part of my university’s co-op programme, than I ever did in any classroom.
In addition to providing valuable experience, workplace learning is an opportunity for employers, businesses and organisations to contribute to skills development in Scotland for the benefit of their own businesses. All the heavy lifting cannot and should not be done through the public purse. There should be an expectation on employers and investors to take some responsibility for the training and development of their staff. After all, they are the ones who are generating profit from their staff. Investing in their people is for their own benefit.
In my region and in portfolio work, I hear many good things from employers about the value of taking on apprentices, and I hear many good things from apprentices, but I also hear frustrations. Employers are frustrated that colleges are inflexible in their offerings, which means that apprentices have to wait months for the school year to start in order to get the course that they need.
Will the member give way?
I am sorry, but I need to make some headway.
The courses are offered on limited and inflexible days, so apprentices’ work weeks are inefficient, and their travel and childcare expenses are increased as a result. Employers that can afford to do so have therefore started using private training providers to overcome those problems and to develop bespoke courses. Private training providers can afford the latest equipment and will teach specific skills, such as how to install a heat pump, for example, rather than the college doing so. The college will include heat pumps as part of a broader plumbing course that does not necessarily meet the needs of that apprentice. In some cases private training provision is questionable, while in other cases it works well.
I spoke to one apprentice who was apprenticed to a local authority. The local authority had designated itself as both employer and training provider. The apprentice had no formal training standards or provision, and she had no one to turn to in order to complain about that state of affairs. She had no independent evaluation of her learning or of the quality of training that she was receiving. If she complained to the local authority about the poor training provision, she risked failing her apprenticeship—and we are failing apprentices like her.
I have already spoken in the chamber about the gender disparities among apprenticeships and, I suspect, in college course provision, too. Men get apprenticeships that put them into well-paid sectors. Women are channelled into low-paid sectors, which may trap them for a lifetime of inequality. We cannot support that on the public dime.
Mechanisms must be put in place to ensure that women have an equal opportunity to gain skills and employment in well-paid sectors. It begs the question of why we use public money to support certain apprenticeship and college courses at all, if the result is—
Ms Slater, you need to conclude.
—that people graduating from those courses do not achieve well-paid work.
I move amendment S6M-19253.2, to leave out from “that future” to end and insert:
“the transformative power of education and training, and the vital roles that colleges and apprenticeships play in supporting young people and building resilient communities, including in a just transition away from fossil fuels; acknowledges the importance of having college facilities located close to where people live, ensuring accessibility and inclusion; believes that improved college governance is essential to prevent poor management decisions and to safeguard the quality of provision; acknowledges the work of EIS-FELA and UNISON in campaigning for better further education provision and supporting college staff across the country who face uncertainty about the future; calls for enhanced outcomes for women, students and apprentices, to ensure that they are not disproportionately channelled into low-waged sectors; urges colleges to align their skills offerings with the ambitions of the National Performance Framework; supports the introduction of regulated minimum training hours and standards for apprenticeships; believes that colleges must be living wage employers and exemplars of fair work practices, and calls for all apprentices to be paid a living wage.”
16:20
It gives me great pleasure to follow Lorna Slater, who gave several very useful insights. This is a useful debate and—dare I say it—it stands in contrast to the previous motion that the Conservatives moved. It is not only that this debate is important but that the motion is based on the facts. The issue is too important for us to ignore the facts, which is why we did not lodge an amendment.
It is important that we let the facts speak for themselves, because a 20 per cent real-terms cut in funding is of concern, and it speaks to the direction of travel of the skills system, which is vital for us to achieve economic growth. That case was made strongly and in a matter-of-fact way by Murdo Fraser—in contrast to the presentation by the person who beat him to the Scottish Conservative leadership. One wonders what might have happened if history had been different.
That position also stands in contrast to the Government’s presentation. We cannot support the Government’s amendment because—I say this with some trepidation—it is misleading. First, the use of the figure of 39,000 individuals in training might make members think that there has been an increase in the number of people in apprenticeships, but we know that the numbers of starts and completions have never recovered to their pre-pandemic levels. The figure is also misleading in another way, because it is not the most up-to-date number. There has been a subsequent iteration of the statistics, and the current number is actually 37,215.
I say gently to Mr Macpherson—because I deeply respect him—that this is not a good start to his time in his role. I know that he is a serious-minded person. I believe him when he states what he wants to do in that job and the importance of skills. However, it is not treating Audit Scotland’s work with seriousness if its key findings are expunged, which is what the Government’s amendment would do, and nor is the subject treated seriously by using essentially misleading figures.
Let us be clear that the situation is serious and has been led to in part by the Government’s mismanaged and poorly handled college reform agenda. It is no good for the Government to say, “We work in partnership with colleges.” The Government brought colleges under its direct control, hobbled their financial flexibility and made it essentially impossible for them to deliver part-time courses. For the Government to stand to one side and wring its hands about the state of the college sector, when it brought the colleges under its direct control, is not credible.
We know that 30,000 fewer Scots are getting places in colleges and that some of the more flexible funding that was available through the flexible workforce development fund has been withdrawn. That is all fundamentally linked to a college funding regime that everyone knows—we can talk to anyone in the sector about it—is well past the point at which it needs reform. I know that this is getting a bit technical but, if we look at it in any detail, it is clear that the college credit system is no longer fit for purpose. If we were going to have a serious debate, we would be looking at those deficiencies.
Will the member give way?
The member has only 30 seconds left to speak.
I reiterate Murdo Fraser’s point that we need to look at reform. Much as Lorna Slater said, we need to look at how we flex our training and apprenticeship system. The problem with the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill is that it is a reshuffling of quangos without any clarity about direction, strategy or intended outcomes for the skills system. For those reasons, we will be supporting the amended Conservative motion. It is also why we oppose the bill in its current form.
16:24
I feel so much better in this second Conservative debate, because the acceptable faces of the Conservative Party are back on the front bench again, giggling away and enjoying themselves—that is what we prefer to see, rather than those in the previous debate.
I have two bits of positive news. First, there is high demand for apprenticeships. We should celebrate that fact; it is a positive thing. Businesses want to take on people of all ages in apprenticeship programmes—that is a great thing. The demand is way in excess of what we are supplying, but it is a positive thing. There is hunger for a growing workforce among those companies, which is a good thing.
Secondly, in the most recent budget negotiations, the Liberal Democrats pursued £3.5 million for skills support in offshore wind and social care, which is progressing. We should celebrate both those things, but that is where the good news ends.
Will the member take an intervention?
Not just now.
Throughout the debate, we have heard repeatedly about the Audit Scotland report, which is one of many reports that should cause the minister, who has newly taken up his post, to shiver. The college sector has experienced a 20 per cent cut in real terms in the past five years alone.
In addition, in its delayed report on financial sustainability, the Scottish Funding Council has identified that most colleges are not financially sustainable and that some are on the verge of insolvency. That should be enough to keep the minister awake at night. Student numbers have been cut by 12 per cent and staff numbers by 8 per cent, so the capacity of colleges has been reduced, too. The SFC predicts that more is yet to come, unless steps are taken.
That comes on top of the Government’s record over the past 15 years, roughly since the regionalisation programme, during which colleges have experienced successive cuts at every opportunity. I do not think that that has happened because Government ministers have wanted to cut college funding but, when ministers are faced with a number of choices, the college sector simply does not compete. As far as the Government is concerned, the sector does not have the requisite political weight or attractiveness. That is why colleges are always at the end of the queue when there is money to go round.
Does Mr Rennie share my concern—I am sure that he does—about what is happening at Scotland’s Rural College’s Elmwood campus in Cupar, where, thanks to cutbacks, courses are being downgraded and removed, which potentially threatens the entire viability of a campus that is of great importance to people locally?
Absolutely. The SRUC is one of those hybrid institutions that provide both higher education and further education. Its main building has been closed, the farm has been sold off, the student accommodation has been closed and the golf course has, in effect, gone. All of that has happened on the SNP Government’s watch.
The SRUC is not alone. There are concerns about cuts at Fife College and Forth Valley College in Alloa. Last week, I attended a meeting with the EIS Further Education Lecturers Association, which is very concerned about the changes at the University of the Highlands and Islands. Dundee and Angus College is having to make £2.5 million of savings this year.
Courses have been cut, student numbers are down and buildings have been closed. That is happening across the country. Therefore, there are a number of things that the minister can no longer claim. First, he cannot claim that he is creating opportunity for people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Colleges are often the route out of poverty, the route into a good job and the route to a good life. As a result of the cuts to colleges, those opportunities are being reduced.
Colleges are particularly important when it comes to the route through FE into HE. That uniquely Scottish route is a great advantage, but the Government can no longer claim credit for it. Parity of esteem can no longer be regarded as a priority for the Government. The Government is not even meeting the demands in relation to the apprenticeship scheme. That is why it needs to realise that it is not fulfilling its rhetoric. All that it has given us is words, and the reality is that we are facing cuts.
We move to the open debate.
16:28
Not a week goes by without me having a meeting with an organisation or speaking to a business in my Lothian region in which the issue of the skills shortages in our economy is raised. I am sure that the same will be true for every MSP. How we redirect the focus of our education system to deliver on the challenge that we face in our college sector will require not only a national effort but difficult decisions to realign future demand in key industries and sectors and meet the demographic changes that our country faces.
As many briefings for the debate state, there is significant unmet demand for places, apprenticeships and courses. That should focus all our minds on how we build a system that can deliver for people. In June, the principals of Ayrshire College and Glasgow Kelvin College gave evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee. Angela Cox from Ayrshire College noted that the college was unable to award a place to 764 students who had passed interviews, and Joanna Campbell from Glasgow Kelvin College noted that the college is accepting only one out of every three applicants. We know that the current system is not delivering to meet demand. The Scottish Government funded 25,507 modern apprenticeship places in 2024-25, but demand exceeded those funded places for learning.
I think that there is a cross-party consensus that we need a new approach, but the Scottish Government’s Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill will not deliver the better system or the vision for apprenticeships that we all want. As Murdo Fraser stated, the SNP’s response to this mess is simply to mess around with quangos and transfer responsibility for the national apprenticeship programme from Skills Development Scotland to the Scottish Funding Council. I do not believe that that is the right move at present. I agree with the concerns that are being expressed by CBI Scotland and Scottish Chambers of Commerce, namely that the bill presents the potential to dismantle what already works and leaves employers in the dark in relation to the future of apprenticeship schemes and our wider workforce system.
As others have touched on, it is important that there is transparency on the spending of the apprenticeship levy here in Scotland. In recent weeks, the Scottish Government has been accused of raiding £171 million from that scheme, and SNP ministers have spent only £704 million of the £875 million that has been raised. Businesses are rightly asking where the rest of the money from the levy has gone and why we have not seen vital training opportunities delivered in Scotland. Michelle Ferguson, the director of CBI Scotland, has stated:
“Businesses are paying in, but they are not seeing the return.”
She added that
“We need full transparency on how levy reserves raised in Scotland”
are spent in Scotland.
The SNP’s record on colleges is shameful. We need to admit that today, and I hope that the Government understands that. There has been a 20 per cent cut in real-terms funding, and the loss of more than 100,000 places. Waiting lists are at record levels, and the credits system is in crisis. When councils try to deliver flexibility, they are not being given the opportunity to take on more students. The new net zero opportunities at North East Scotland College, which we have been told about at committee, will not see any more credit.
The Government needs to look at how we can achieve more and how our college sector can deliver. Above all, we need a skills revolution in Scotland. That is why Scottish Conservatives are leading the debate for change. We want a significant increase of 10,000 in the number of modern apprenticeship places to boost economic growth, create jobs and allow businesses to expand. Working with our college sector and businesses, we can meet our young people’s aspirations and deliver to tackle the shortages that our workforce and our economy face. I support Murdo Fraser’s motion.
16:32
No one in the chamber doubts that Scotland’s economic success depends on people, on skills and on the talent and ambition of our workforce. To build a fair and resilient economy, we need more than slogans about growth; we need investment in people, in fair work and in the systems that help people to thrive. That is what the Scottish Government has been doing, despite a decade of Westminster austerity that has cut Scotland’s capital and resource budgets in real terms year after year.
Let us look at some of the fundamentals. Ninety-three per cent of school leavers have a positive destination, and the Scottish Government has provided apprenticeships and training to a record 39,000 individuals. No one, including Tory MSPs, can explain away the impact of Brexit and no one, including Labour MSPs, can argue that the UK Government’s migration system is contributing to filling key skills gaps and labour market shortages. Both parties lie down to the Farage narrative.
The Conservative motion talks about restoring college funding and expanding apprenticeships. Those are worthy aims, but it is worth reminding members that the Conservatives’ economic decisions stripped more than £1.6 billion from Scotland’s spending power since 2021-22.
Even in those circumstances, however, Scotland’s approach to skills is working. The national strategy for economic transformation, the fair work action plan and the skills delivery landscape review are aligning education, business and Government to deliver the workforce that Scotland needs. The minister talked about the energy skills partnership and the work that it is doing, which is relevant to my constituency of East Lothian. The Scottish Government has protected more than 25,000 apprenticeship places, prioritising sectors that are driving future growth, such as renewables—
Will the member give way on that point?
I have only four minutes, Mr Hoy.
Those sectors include renewables, digital, health and social care, construction and engineering. Apprenticeships in Scotland are not just about filling vacancies; they are about building a fair, productive and inclusive economy. Our colleges have been at the forefront of that, supporting young people, career changers and those who are furthest from the labour market to access opportunities that change lives.
I have seen at first hand how colleges support my constituency by working with local employers. My local college, Edinburgh College, has stated that the south-east of Scotland region
“is the fastest growing in Scotland”
and that
“84% of Scotland’s population growth in the next ten years will be in Edinburgh and Southeast Scotland”,
with East Lothian’s population forecast to grow by a third.
Edinburgh College has also stated that it supports the reforms that are proposed in the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill. It said:
“It is imperative that apprenticeship provision is expanded if we are to take advantage of the substantial economic opportunities that come from our region’s demographic growth.”
Last year, the college carried out its own skills survey research with regional employers. It stated that
“88% of employers say that some”
of their
“vacancies are hard to fill due to difficulties finding applicants with the required skills, knowledge and/or experience”.
It is important that we look at the reforms that the Government is proposing in that regard.
A strong college sector is a key driver to economic success in East Lothian and across Scotland in order to take those opportunities forward. We can contrast that with the Conservatives’ record: scrapping free tuition, cutting investment in lifelong learning and tying the hands of devolved Governments through austerity budgets. It is not a credible lecture on opportunity—it is an exercise in economic hypocrisy.
Let us be clear that Scotland’s skills system is being held back not by a lack of ambition or ability, but by a lack of powers. We do not control migration to fill skills gaps, we cannot borrow to invest strategically in college estates, and we do not get a fair return from the energy resources off our shores. That is why independence matters. It is not a distraction from economic priorities; it is the essential step to deliver them. With full powers, Scotland could invest directly in the skills that underpin a fair work nation, where every worker earns a decent wage, has security and shares in the prosperity that they help to create.
The SNP will always back investment in skills, apprenticeships and fair work, but the real choice that is before us is simple: do we want to manage decline under Westminster austerity or to build opportunity with the powers of independence? I know which side I am on.
16:36
As many members will know, I served a happy period as my party’s shadow skills minister, and it gave me plenty of opportunities to regularly meet representatives from the sector, undertake visits around the country and see at first hand some of the incredible things that can be done with skills and training. It underlined to me that, as we have heard from colleagues today, a skilled workforce is the central driver of a successful economy, but it also highlighted the many shortcomings in our current system. That system is clearly struggling rather than thriving, and it is expected to do more with less, time and time again.
The sector is no stranger to being deprioritised and defunded but, perhaps more than any other public service, it has been forced to sit through endless strategies and action plans that talk big but achieve so little. That has all happened while every stakeholder and most of the budgets have been sliced to the bone and rhetoric from ministers rarely, if ever, matches delivery.
It was once a popular cry from members on the SNP benches that this Parliament lacked economic levers. Education and skills are, without a doubt, some of the greatest economic levers that we can pull, but the Government’s record tells us what it thinks about that proposition. That record has left the majority of employers highlighting key skills shortages and struggles to recruit, and the college sector has been asked to find even greater savings, with the inevitable results of shrinking provision and holes in budgets.
Increasingly, there is a lack of real choice for Scotland’s young people and all those who want to train and learn beyond school. Last week’s Audit Scotland report “Scotland’s colleges 2025” is damning. It tells a tale not only of funding cuts by the Government, but of colleges being forced to make savings by decimating their workforce, risks that courses simply will not run, and a bleak financial outlook for the future. We should not and must not hold back from saying clearly that that means a future with fewer opportunities across the board.
Audit Scotland notes that one concern that is voiced by colleges is “competition from universities”. I have spoken in the chamber before about the risk of treating university as a default destination. Even today, there is often a clear divide in many people’s minds between the academic route, on the one hand, and the vocational route, on the other, and judgments are made on their respective value. For many school leavers, the full spectrum of options that are available, including perhaps less conventional routes, often remains unknown.
We foist a great deal of expectation on our young people in their teenage years, telling them to choose subjects, choose a degree and choose a career, and although some may have a great deal of certainty at that stage of their life, most do not. That is why I advocate for an improved approach to careers guidance in our schools. Matching people with the apprenticeships, training courses and qualifications that they need to succeed is not an optional extra; it must be the bedrock of our economic strategy.
Equally, we should not see skills only through the lens of young people. I am sure that many members have friends or colleagues who are in completely different jobs and careers from when they set out. However, a stubborn gap remains in provision for retraining. It is by no means original to say that the promise of lifelong learning that we have often heard about in the chamber has consistently been more of a soundbite than reality. An attempt to make it a genuine aspect of Scotland’s skills landscape will become increasingly essential if people are to be able to navigate an economy that is changing faster than ever before, when existing skills can become redundant quickly, and when people may need more support to progress or policies that recognise the need to learn while earning in a more flexible way.
I am not optimistic about the Government’s direction for skills training and colleges. Although I welcome that the Government, having thrown off the shackles of the Green’s anti-business ideologies, seems at least to acknowledge that the economy exists, it is failing to engage with economic growth and the challenges of productivity in any meaningful way. In the coming years, we will face an economic transformation whether the Scottish Government sees it coming or not. There is a great deal to do but, first, that requires a Government that will give the skills and college sector the support that it deserves.
16:41
I can think of few policy areas that better sum up the knackered SNP Government than the state of Scotland’s colleges. For years, colleges have asked the Government to give them a clear purpose as part of a wider economy and skills system. Audit Scotland’s 2022 report was damning of the Government’s lack of leadership of the skills system in general. That is part of the reason behind the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Bill. The Cumberford-Little report has sat on the shelf, gathering dust, for half a decade. For years, colleges have warned about the impact of budget cuts, which the SNP has delivered time and time again.
In 2022, Audit Scotland warned that change was needed to ensure that the college sector would be financially sustainable in the long term. It gave the same warning in 2023 and again in 2024. Just last week, the auditor general continued to bang his head against the SNP’s brick wall and gave a damning verdict for 2025. Setting aside the spin and the bluster, he has confirmed that, since 2021-22, there has been a staggering 20 per cent real-terms cut in funding for college budgets. I am afraid that that is a lamentable start to the Minister for Higher and Further Education’s tenure in office.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, thank you, sir.
It is regrettable that he has deleted the entirety of Audit Scotland’s analysis from the motion that we are debating.
Ben Macpherson rose—
I am glad that the minister is on his feet. Does he accept Audit Scotland’s verdict?
I respect Mr Marra, as well as Mr Fraser. If the members read the Scottish Government’s amendment, they will see that it notes the Audit Scotland report.
It is one thing to note that it exists, but it is another thing to ignore entirely the analysis that it sets out, as the minister did in his opening speech. The rest of the amendment attributes the college sector’s problems to Brexit and to some supposed form of continued austerity. People are asking what on earth has happened to the additional £5.2 billion in spending that was allocated to the Government in the UK’s recently passed budget. What on earth has happened to the money?
rose—
No, thank you. The minister has had his chance.
At the same time as his Government is launching a cross-sectoral conversation about the sustainability of the university funding model, we are hearing that there might be a similar conversation for colleges. Perversely, that is happening while the Government is pushing a bill through the Parliament that deals with the tertiary education sector and fails to reference any of that work or how those things might interact. The idea that you can deal with one part of the tertiary sector without thinking about the others is, frankly, ridiculous. It guarantees that there will be further damage.
The dual crises in our colleges and universities are inextricably linked. The minister must understand that, when more universities go into clearing, colleges miss out on hundreds of students and hundreds of thousands of pounds. The principal of Dundee and Angus College has told that exact story in the press this week. It is an award-winning college—one of the best in the country—but it has suffered year-on-year cuts. One in eight members of staff have lost their jobs, and it is looking at a further £2.3 million of cuts this year. The minister has to recognise that his Government took all those colleges into its direct control and that, therefore, he has to be able to tell us where he thinks that Dundee and Angus College should make the cuts.
This is a systemic mess. It is the result of grotesque incompetence and, worst of all, it was entirely foreseen. When I stood in the chamber and warned about the unsustainability of the university funding model, I was shouted down by the First Minister, and the Scottish National Party press office put out memes with my face on them. That was the Government’s response: to try to shut down debate. This is a deeply unserious Government that is refusing to confront the issues that are staring it in the face—as it is doing today in the chamber.
The minister has to realise that his tenure comes at the end of 20 years of the SNP’s wilful neglect of Scotland’s colleges. We are at the fag-end of a knackered Government. Our colleges have fewer staff, fewer students and fewer courses, our students have fewer opportunities, our economy is weakened and our communities are diminished.
16:45
Since 2020, Scotland’s construction workforce has increased from 226,000 to 240,000, but a high turnover and retirements are straining capacity. In June this year, the Construction Industry Training Board highlighted that the industry must recruit 48,000 people by 2034 to meet demand. However, there are only 39,000 modern apprenticeships across Scotland, with 25 per cent of them being in construction-related occupations. Yes, we need more construction apprenticeships, especially now that Brexit has discouraged European workers from coming to not only Scotland but the whole of the UK. However, we should remember that an apprenticeship is a work-based learning programme, meaning that the individual must be employed by a company to begin training and will benefit from earning a wage while they work and study at college.
In my constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands, I have met young people who are eager to learn a trade and contribute to their communities but are too often met by closed doors because our small and medium-sized enterprises, which make up 98 per cent of Scotland’s construction sector, often lack the resources to take on apprentices, especially at a time when they are struggling in the face of an increased construction material inflation rate of 37 per cent since 2020 and as educational institutions incur costs of £50 million as a result of the recent national insurance hike, which is Labour’s tax on job creation.
Of course, the apprenticeship employer grant can provide up to £7,500 per apprentice. In addition, since 2006, apprenticeship completion rates have improved from around 50 per cent to nearly 80 per cent, which is significantly higher than in England, with sustained employment of 89 per cent among apprentices who complete their apprenticeship.
Although we still see firms that are hesitant to make that commitment to invest in apprenticeships, there are encouraging signs that some companies are trying to fill their skills gaps by employing more apprentices. For example, Kier Construction, which won the contract to build, in my constituency, Scotland’s first Passivhaus-standard secondary school incorporating a swimming pool—Currie community high—created a total of 42 apprenticeships during the building project. In addition, it dedicated more than 400 hours to delivering educational outreach to secondary pupils from local schools, in the hope that they will consider a job in construction when they go into the world of work.
Last academic year, Wester Hailes high school piloted a new construction pathway, with support from the Scottish Traditional Building Forum and the City of Edinburgh Council. The national 5 creative industries course in roof slating was so successful that it is being repeated this year, along with a nat 5 creative industries course in stone carving. By giving those courses parity of esteem with academic subjects, we are encouraging young people to consider a career in construction.
Edinburgh College’s Granton construction campus has state-of-the-art workshops in CITB-approved training areas. It emphasises hands-on learning and realistic workshops, including simulated sites for bricklaying, roofing and site management. There are many benefits to companies of that approach. In year 1, apprentices perform basic tasks under supervision, reducing the workload for skilled tradespeople; by year 2, apprentices take on semi-independent tasks, handling routine jobs; from year 3 onwards, apprentices work near-independently, doing complex tasks, and achieve a level 3 Scottish vocational qualification. They then qualify as tradespeople. It is estimated that, at that point, companies will start to see returns on the investment, with apprentices generating income of between £30,000 and £50,000 a year for employers.
We have the training facilities and the young people with an interest in construction. We just need employers, despite the challenges, to invest in their businesses’ future.
We move to closing speeches. I advise that there is no time in hand.
16:49
In my opening remarks, I shared some of the frustrations that I have heard about apprenticeships and colleges. I think that there is a lot that we can do to improve both. I am hopeful that the implementation of the Withers review recommendations will shake some of this out and bring to the sector the strategy and dynamism that are desperately needed. College governance needs to be improved in order to prevent poor management decisions. Colleges need to be more flexible and adaptable to the changing needs for skills provision, and they need to work more closely with employers.
Some colleges are doing an excellent job of that, but some are not. Even while they are struggling, we must recognise that the contribution that colleges make is substantial and vital. Although I wish that we could focus solely on improving college and other education and training provision, I fear that we are in a situation in which we must work harder and more urgently to prevent its imminent decline.
My sympathies are with college staff across the country who face uncertainty about their future. There is huge uncertainty about the future of many of our local colleges. The University and College Union announced last night that staff at the University of the Highlands and Islands are likely to strike over planned redundancies. It is important to retain the current structure of local units, to keep further education colleges in place across the Highlands and Islands. That approach meets local needs and provides effective tertiary education, giving both further education and higher education equal importance. When Forth Valley College announced proposals to close the facility in Alloa, with an explanation that the three-campus model was no longer sustainable, a rally took place, which was attended by politicians, staff and students.
Local colleges allow people who would otherwise be excluded to access further education. For many people, it simply is not possible to travel long distances to study or to live away from home. We need to stop imagining that all students are young people who are moving out of their parents’ home to study. We need to imagine them as people who have jobs and families and who need to upskill while still getting home every night and putting in enough solid shifts to pay the rent every week. We need to imagine students as disabled people who cannot travel far. We need to imagine them as people who have the complex and varied lives that people actually have, and who need skills and training to thrive and seize opportunities. That is the challenge that is ahead of us—to make skills and training available to more people under more flexible circumstances. We need to rethink how those skills are taught and what is taught using public money, to meet our strategic aims and to increase opportunity and reduce inequality.
We know that we have national skills shortages relating to our transition to a green and net zero economy. It would make sense to prioritise our limited funds in that direction. We can start with the basics: colleges should be living-wage employers and apprentices should be paid the living wage. We cannot build a better economy on the backs of people who are being paid poverty wages.
16:53
This evening, Scottish Labour will support the motion, because the core point in it is crucial and the Parliament should speak as one on it.
Colleges have been hammered and, with them, so have the life chances of thousands of young people and others in Scotland. Audit Scotland is clear that enrolments are falling, targeted funds are being pooled and the funding model nudges colleges to offer cheaper credits instead of what local economies actually need.
The fact that student satisfaction remains above 90 per cent is not a pat-on-the-back moment for the SNP Government; it is a tribute to the staff who have held the line while funding has not. Colleges, students and employers have been sounding alarm bells for years, yet, when the Auditor General publishes a report, all we get from the Government is an amendment to entirely delete the reality and to instead pat itself on the back and point fingers. As my colleague Daniel Johnson said, this is not a good start for the new minister. The Government is in outright denial, and its continual failure to connect with reality will let down yet more staff and students and curtail futures.
We hear from ministers about the tough fiscal climate and a 2.6 per cent teaching uplift. Let us be straight: a one-year cash tweak does not undo five years of a 20 per cent real-terms hit. It should, as Willie Rennie said, cause the Government to shiver. Only the SNP Government could spin £5.2 billion extra in a budget as a tough deal.
If there truly was “continued investment”, principals would not be cancelling courses, freezing recruitment and preparing for deficit budgets. As other members have said, the education system tells us that we need at least 34,000 modern apprenticeships to match Scotland’s growth ambitions, but we are delivering just over 5,000.
We are running with the handbrake on. While the gap persists, one in six young people—16.1 per cent—are not in education, employment or training. That is untapped talent, which causes projects to slip back due to a lack of labour. If the SNP wonders why the Scottish Fiscal Commission tells it that there is an economic potential gap, it does not need to look further than that.
Colleges are not simply lines in a spreadsheet; they are the engine rooms of Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Inverness and our rural communities. They are where a school leaver learns a trade and where an adult learner retrains for a new career, as Lorna Slater and other members have pointed out. They are where key services and industries renew their skills. If we squeeze colleges, we squeeze social mobility and we choke growth.
Although the Government points fingers elsewhere, it is the SNP’s funding decisions and the cap on apprenticeship numbers, which Scottish ministers control, that are holding Scotland back. I have listened to the members on the Government benches today: if they are denying that there is even a problem, it is no wonder that not one of them could give us a single solution. They are not the ones to fix the problem.
Scottish Labour recognises the struggles of colleges and we have a plan to help them. We will restore sustainable funding so that colleges can plan beyond a single year. We will lift the number of modern apprenticeship places, speed up the approval of new frameworks and make routes more flexible. We will put the needs of industry and our population at the heart of our policy, giving levy payers and small and medium-sized enterprises a real say—
Will Pam Duncan-Glancy give way?
She will be concluding shortly.
We will start earlier in our schools, because skills are not just an add-on to exams; they are critical opportunities and critical to opportunity. We will grow practical learning, modern careers advice and proper work-based pathways.
This is about basic competence. It is about funding the places that we need to match the demand that we have, which the SNP has failed to do. This is about backing our colleges. When we do that, Scotland will feel the lift in pay packets, productivity and pride. Let us give our young people the certainty and the opportunities that they deserve, and give workforces the careers and skills that they deserve.
Let us back our colleges, back our apprentices and back Scotland’s future.
16:57
Many points have made in the debate. I will address some of them and rebut some of the claims that have been made by other parties in relation to our vibrant college sector.
Murdo Fraser started by talking down the Scottish economy. Although we agree that it is very tough out there in many ways, let us not forget that, since 2007, gross domestic product per person in Scotland has grown by 10.3 per cent compared with 6.8 per cent in the UK. Productivity is growing at an average rate of 0.9 per cent per year, compared with 0.3 per cent in the rest of the UK.
I was not talking anything down; I was quoting from the survey that was published this morning by the Scottish Chambers of Commerce and the Fraser of Allander Institute. You will not listen to me, but why will you not listen to them?
Always speak through the chair.
I would always rather listen to them than to you, with all due respect—
Always speak through the chair, please.
I take on board the fact that it is very challenging out there. Our colleges have such a crucial role to play in ensuring that we have the skills that we need for the future economy and that we are helping young people to get on the ladder in life, and in opening up new opportunities and horizons for them.
I congratulate the colleges, schools and training providers on what they are achieving. In the 2024-25 academic year, 110,380 vocational and technical qualifications and awards were issued. That is a new landmark, and the numbers are up 21.6 per cent on the year before. I congratulate all the education providers who helped to achieve that. Also, as Ben Macpherson said in his opening remarks, 93 per cent of school leavers have a positive destination, which is something to celebrate.
Daniel Johnson said that the figure of 39,000 individuals that is mentioned in the Scottish Government’s amendment misleads the Parliament, but that is a very accurate figure. The figure that he quoted was for the first quarter of this year, whereas the figure that we quote is the whole-year figure for last year. Clearly, the figures change throughout the year, so we have to use the annual figure and not the quarterly figure. Our figure is accurate and we have not misled the Parliament.
I would like to put on record the amazing work that our colleges are doing in Scotland. A few weeks ago, I had the honour of attending the 15th anniversary gala dinner of the City of Glasgow College, of which I am an alumnus, with the First Minister and many other people. I attended the predecessor college, the Central College of Commerce in Glasgow, in the mid-1980s. I was a lot younger then than I am now, and I graduated with a higher national certificate in business studies at that time. Here I am, standing in 2025 as Minister for Business and Employment in the Scottish Government, so I certainly benefited from my time at college, as have hundreds of thousands of young people across Scotland over the years.
I visited Glasgow Kelvin College just a few weeks ago. I was blown away by its innovation and its work to ensure that we have the right skills for the 21st century, teaching young people what they require for the new economy. It is working with six innovation hubs, involving a number of colleges that have received UK Government funding to take forward its innovation agenda. It is great to see that collaboration.
I also had the privilege of recently visiting Fife College and its fantastic new campus that is being built in Dunfermline. Fife College is excited about the future, as well; there is a lot of positivity out there.
The minister mentioned that he gained an HNC in business studies and that he had an opportunity. Such opportunities drive the economy; his opportunity found him a job. However, young people in the Borders are unable to get on to courses because they are being limited, and they cannot get jobs. The economy will suffer as a result.
The leader of the UK Conservative Party was in the news over the past couple of days suggesting that cuts of £47 billion be made to public spending. The Scottish Conservative Party is here today arguing for more and more spending—in this debate, on further education—at the same time that the party is arguing for cuts to public spending. The Conservatives cannot have it both ways.
This is a very challenging time for public spending in Scotland. As we all know, it has been extremely challenging for the past few years. We have budget negotiations coming up in the next few weeks. The Conservative Party and the Labour Party will have an ideal opportunity to argue for greater budgets for the many different issues that they bring to the chamber for which they want bigger budgets. At the same time, they will be able to outline where they want cuts to take place to ensure that we can fund the increases that they keep arguing for.
A number of issues have made life very challenging for colleges over the past few years. Every time that Brexit is mentioned, members of the Conservative Party in particular shake their heads and pretend that it is irrelevant. However, if we speak to any college in Scotland—or, indeed, to universities and the rest of the further and higher education sector—they will talk about Brexit and the impact that it has had on skills, as many members have mentioned, including, I think, Miles Briggs. They all mention Brexit, as well as the financial hit and the number of students from European countries who have been unable to come as easily as they used to to attend not only universities but colleges.
The idea that rising energy bills—energy is the responsibility of the UK Government—the Truss budget, which came from the Conservative Party, and the increase in employer national insurance contributions from the Labour Government do not have an impact on the finances of colleges is ridiculous. Of course they do, and that is what we are coping with.
It is a very tough subject, but we will continue to stand up for Scotland’s colleges as we move forward. I urge the Parliament to back the Scottish Government’s amendment.
17:02
Just recently, the Deputy First Minister described colleges as the “engines of innovation” while she was announcing new schemes to help to turn research initiatives into high-growth businesses. That point was strongly welcomed by Scotland’s chief entrepreneur, Ana Stewart. That was on the back of the Deputy First Minister’s Panmure house speech in June, when she spoke very well about the need for greater collaboration between the public and private sectors to try to harness Scotland’s true investment and economic growth potential.
As Willie Rennie reminded us, colleges are hugely important when it comes to stimulating economic growth. That is why, last week, Audit Scotland described colleges as a vital anchor in local communities and regional economies. Let us hear what college principals are saying. One said:
“To think that the sector could operate or indeed maintain provision after having our budgets slashed by 10 per cent last year was challenging, but to have them reduced again ... is just baffling.”
That college principal was Miles Dibsdall of Telford College and he said that at the Education and Culture Committee back in 2011. That is well before Brexit, yet, since then, despite all the rhetoric that we have had from various higher and further education ministers, we have seen an erosion of college sustainability.
John Vincent, the principal of Glasgow Clyde College, told the cross-party group on colleges and universities just last week that demand for apprenticeship places is very strong but that it cannot be met because of Scottish Government cuts. In other words, the SNP, with its financial constraints on colleges, is preventing some people from taking up work.
We have problems at Forth Valley College’s Alloa campus, which is in the kind of area where we desperately need new training opportunities, and Fife College and the University of the Highlands and Islands are harbouring serious concerns about long-term sustainability. All of that puts in jeopardy valuable opportunities that should be designed to stimulate growth. If we are serious about addressing economic inactivity, improving skills and retraining and creating a more innovative and flexible labour market, it should go without saying that our colleges should be a priority for Government. It makes no sense at all to cut their budget in real terms by 20 per cent since 2021 and to strip out £141 million in real terms from the Scottish Funding Council. That is at a time when the overall block grant has been going up, despite what Mr McLennan said.
As has been said, colleges and other providers wanted 34,000 places in 2024-25, and the Scottish Government gave them 25,500. Scottish Engineering tells us that it thinks that a fifth of the skills demand has been unmet due to real-terms funding cuts. There is no policy logic to that at all, just as there was no policy logic in the SNP budget of two years ago, which cut the economy portfolio by 8.3 per cent in real terms, including cuts to employability and enterprise support and tourism. We know that more than half of businesses are experiencing skills shortages, with a high percentage of those being very pessimistic about the next five years.
Nor is there any policy logic in persistently increasing tax levels in Scotland, despite the evidence of employers—whether they are large-scale businesses such as Tesco or our smallest businesses in our high streets—or what the Fraser of Allander Institute and Scottish Chambers of Commerce said yesterday. It is clear that those tax policies are hindering our capacity to drive growth.
What is really important, and has been for a long time, is that the funding model for tertiary and higher education is not sustainable and needs to change, as Michael Marra and Lorna Slater said. We simply cannot have a situation in which 22 out of 24 colleges expect to spend more than their income this year, and in which the funding for a college student is a little more than £2,500 lower than it is for a higher education student. I completely understand that there cannot be full parity, but neither should there be such a huge gap in income. Likewise, under some apprenticeship frameworks, colleges are being subcontracted to deliver training, but only 40 per cent of the Scottish Government funding reaches the college that is delivering the training. That just cannot be right.
For the sake of boosting the quality of Scottish tertiary and higher education, we on the Conservative benches are pleading with the Scottish Government to completely rethink its priorities and to be serious about the need to reform the funding model. If it does not do that, it will not only badly let down another generation of Scottish students but seriously undermine Scotland’s competitiveness.
Ministers need to bear in mind that international trends show clearly that the further and higher education systems that are the most successful in focusing on teaching and research and the best educational outcomes, rather than on governance, are those that are at the greatest arm’s length from Government. That is not a political point; it is one that reflects what works best in education. On that note, I support the motion in the name of Murdo Fraser.
That concludes the debate on backing Scotland’s colleges and apprenticeships. There will be a short pause before we move to the next item of business.
Previous
Illegal ImmigrationNext
Secure Accommodation