Official Report 711KB pdf
Regional Strategic Bodies and Regional Colleges (Glasgow and Lanarkshire) Order 2025 [Draft]
Our next agenda item is consideration of an item of subordinate legislation that is subject to the affirmative procedure. The committee will take evidence on the draft Regional Strategic Bodies and Regional Colleges (Glasgow and Lanarkshire) Order 2025 from the Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans, and his officials. The minister will also move the motion that the order be approved. I welcome Graeme Dey, who is accompanied by Jess Dolan, head of institutional governance and reform; and Alison Martin, solicitor.
I invite the minister to speak to the draft order.
12:00
I am delighted to be here to discuss the draft Regional Strategic Bodies and Regional Colleges (Glasgow and Lanarkshire) Order 2025, which seeks to reform the governance arrangements in the Glasgow and Lanarkshire college regions. The draft order makes amendments to existing legislation to abolish two regional strategic bodies—the Glasgow Colleges Regional Board and the Lanarkshire Board—and designates the three Glasgow colleges and South Lanarkshire College as regional colleges.
I put on record my thanks to the Scottish Funding Council and those across the college sector who have helped to shape the recommendations that have been made to the Government. I also acknowledge the work that the committee did as part of its inquiry into college regionalisation, which highlighted the success of the single college region model and the need for reform of the regional strategic bodies in order to realise the original aims of college regionalisation.
The Government has carefully considered the case for change, and I am confident that the draft order delivers the right governance reforms to achieve our collective ambitions for the colleges in the Glasgow and Lanarkshire regions. It is imperative that colleges provide a high-quality, streamlined learning offering that is rooted in a robust understanding of local needs, as well as regional and national priorities. That is what Scotland’s economy, its employers and its communities need from our colleges. In ensuring that colleges are equipped to fulfil their role as anchor institutions, it is crucial that we reflect on experience and the changing landscape so that we can introduce reforms that will enable effective change to take place.
The regional strategic bodies in the Glasgow and Lanarkshire regions have played a key role in recent years, but the time is right to remove that additional layer of bureaucracy, which will allow the colleges to flourish under a single college region governance model and will promote the colleges’ ability to collaborate with the right partners.
It is crucial that we have robust accountability and assurance processes that hold colleges to account. Having a direct funding and accountability relationship with the SFC as opposed to the regional strategic bodies, and the chair of the boards of the newly designated regional colleges being appointed by the Scottish ministers, will achieve improved college accountability.
I hope that the committee agrees that the draft order addresses many of the concerns that were set out in the committee’s inquiry report. If approved, the reform arrangements will come into force on 30 July 2025.
I welcome any questions that committee members may have.
I welcome the draft order. I think that it is great that we will get rid of the Glasgow Colleges Regional Board, and I am delighted that the three colleges will be separate. Can the minister say anything about collaboration between the three colleges going forward? Although I want the colleges to be independent, they will need to work together to some extent.
That is one of the areas that I explored when I was considering what action to take. As well as wanting to encourage collaboration, we wanted to avoid getting into a situation in which there might be predatory behaviour or the duplication of provision. There was an existing informal structure between the colleges that facilitated that. I am satisfied that the concerns that I might have had about what that arrangement might have led to were unjustified. The SFC will work with the colleges to develop appropriate collaborative arrangements, which will be overseen in line with existing accountability and assurance processes, and in compliance with statutory requirements.
It is also important to recognise that collaboration arrangements could be broader than the obvious arrangements that you might think of. For example, in your region of Glasgow, you might think about the three Glasgow colleges collaborating, but the strategic regional planning board, which I met yesterday, is working across a six-college area with West College Scotland and the two Lanarkshire colleges. I know that some thought is being given to more collaborative working between one of the Lanarkshire colleges and a Glasgow college, because the public transport links are better than they were between the two Lanarkshire colleges.
The proposed changes in the draft order will facilitate greater collaboration of the type that I think we are all looking for. The SFC will work with colleges to ensure that that happens.
I certainly hope that that is the case. Sometimes, personalities come into these things, as we have discussed previously on other subjects. Is our system robust enough to ensure that, whoever the chairs of colleges are, it can still work?
I will take Glasgow as an example. It has three colleges that are specific to the city. Two of those might be described as doing the typical community work that you would expect of colleges. That is their strength. The other is quite unique. It is something between a university and a college, and it is unique in having substantial commercial income. It attracts international students in a way that the other two colleges do not.
Given the principals who are in place at the moment, I am confident that, through the appointment process for chairs, we will manage to ensure that we attract the kind of strong individual who I want to chair our colleges—the kind of individual who will hold principals to account but will also see the bigger picture. Having heard yesterday in Glasgow about the skills planning work that is going on, I think that there is a coherent vision not just for Glasgow, but for Lanarkshire and the area that is covered by West College Scotland.
I very much support the proposed change, which I think will significantly improve college governance. However, could you provide a bit of clarity on what the impact will be on the handful of staff who are involved? Much as this is the right move when it comes to overall governance and efficiency, the Glasgow Colleges Regional Board has some brilliant and highly skilled staff, whose individual contributions have added a lot to the sector in recent years. Are they to be transferred to the individual colleges?
I echo those sentiments, and I acknowledge the impact that all the talk, over a number of years, about the proposed changes has had on those staff. I do not think that anyone who has called for those changes has implied any criticism of the staff who work for the regional body. My understanding is that all five staff who are affected have chosen to take voluntary redundancy.
To be fair, it was suggested by the colleges that they would seek to offer employment opportunities. I am not entirely sure whether that happened, but it was certainly talked about. However, all the staff have chosen to take voluntary severance. Ultimately, I hope that the skills and talents that they have shown might not be lost to the college sector.
If they have already taken voluntary packages, I will not pursue the matter further, but I echo your hope that we can find a way to retain the skills and knowledge that they have built up in the sector.
I share Ross Greer’s concern, but I also appreciate the recognition for the staff concerned that the minister has put on the record.
I have two questions, the first of which builds on the answers that the minister gave to John Mason. What, specifically, is his vision for a co-ordinated approach? How does he hope that the colleges in the region will collaborate to provide the best opportunity for skills across the region?
Secondly, when can colleges in Glasgow expect to receive any of the funds—to the tune of about £500,000, I think—that were top sliced for the board?
I do not want to avoid answering the first question but, as the member knows, I am a great believer in empowering the colleges to have and deliver that vision, rather than ministers dictating what it should look like.
From my visit to Glasgow yesterday, it was clear that a coherent vision of the needs of the city and the wider area is being pulled together. I was heartened by some of what is already happening—in particular, when it comes to centres of excellence. There is already something there that will be built on, and I have every confidence that it will align with what that locality requires and that it will provide an example for other parts of the country of how to co-operate and collaborate. That was heartening.
On the question about the moneys that will be raised, the member is quite right to talk about the top slicing that took place in order to fund GCRB. My understanding—Jess Dolan will correct me if I am wrong—is that a top slice of a sort has been retained for 2025-26, which is to cover any residual costs that are incurred in winding up the regional body.
We anticipate that anything that is left at the conclusion of that process would be returned to the colleges in November. Therefore, we are already starting to see the financial benefit of the change. You will appreciate that we have to complete the winding-up process, which should be done by November.
In the following years, can colleges in Glasgow expect to have the additional funding reflected in their allocations?
Do you want to answer that, Jess?
Allocations will take place through the SFC, as is the standard format. Each individual college will receive its individual allocation, which will not be top sliced.
The colleges might have concerns about planning for the transition and then being able to engage in some of the collaborative activity that the minister might have seen on his visit yesterday or discussed with them, because some of that might have a cost attached to it. I want to identify that each college might need to consider that.
The colleges were already participating in such activity under the regional model. One area that I explored yesterday—I have done this in a number of forums—was the need to ensure that, if economic planning is taking place in an area in relation to things such as city deals or green freeports, or at a more localised level, the cost that might be incurred by the colleges is factored in, and additionality is provided to meet the additional asks of colleges in specific areas. That was one of the issues that we discussed yesterday.
Thank you—I appreciate that.
Why has it taken us so long to get to this point? The Government first asked the SFC to look at the issue in 2020. When it did, it said that the
“status quo is not tenable”.
When the committee looked at the issue more than two years ago, it concluded, in March 2023, that the proposal that you have brought forward today was the right approach. Is that the pace that we should be going at, given that what we are talking about is not particularly controversial?
If you know me, you will know that I would work at a considerably greater pace on everything if I could.
There were two complicating factors, one of which was down to me. As I said, I wanted to be satisfied that, if we removed the level of oversight that the regional strategic bodies have provided, we would not get into a situation in which there would be predatory and competitive behaviour. I took a little bit of time to consider that—in fact, I met all the chairs and principals in order to iron out those points.
The other complicating factor was that the Withers report came along in the midst of that process. We wanted to be assured—
That did not really happen in the midst of it—we are talking about a five-year period.
I am not making excuses, but I have been in post for only two years. I recall that, as we were working through the process, we wanted to test the advice that we had received from the SFC. We wanted to know whether, given what James Withers was asking for, what was in that advice was still the SFC’s view.
You will also be aware, as it was alluded to earlier, that there has been some contention, such as complaints and so on, around college activity in the city of Glasgow. All round, we probably took longer than I would have wanted us to, but I wanted to be sure that we got it right, which I think we have in the end.
Separately, what do you think that the proposal means for the future of the University of the Highlands and Islands, as it is now the only remaining body with such a structure? Are you satisfied that nothing should change and that UHI is operating well, or do you have concerns that, as it is the last remaining institution with that structure, it should perhaps change as well?
Extensive work is under way not only to protect the concept of UHI but to future proof it. A little while after I came into post, I met UHI central—if you want to call it that—which outlined a vision of what reform might look like. I had some concerns about that—you might have done, too—because I wanted UHI to ensure that the voices of the local colleges that are involved in delivery were heard and so on.
12:15To UHI’s credit, it has done exactly that. An extensive piece of redesign work is going on. I am heartened that it appears to be taking people with it on the journey, which is essential.
Again, the process has taken longer than I would have wanted, but I anticipate that UHI will come back to the Government as soon as it has been able to firm up the proposal. It will have a business case for us to consider, but I am keen that we do whatever we can, at pace, to support UHI in ensuring that the concept is absolutely protected in a way that is sustainable for the long term. That work is on-going across the colleges concerned.
You have said “as soon as possible” a couple of times. Do you have a timescale? Will that work be completed in this parliamentary session or the next?
I will write back to you on that. We are in UHI’s hands when it comes to delivery, which will be determined by the pace at which it can get agreement on all that. I will reflect on that and come back to you.
As there are no other questions, I invite the minister to move motion S6M-17468.
Motion moved,
That the Education, Children and Young People Committee recommends that the Regional Strategic Bodies and Regional Colleges (Glasgow and Lanarkshire) Order 2025 [draft] be approved.—[Graeme Dey.]
Motion agreed to.
The committee must now produce its report on the draft order. Is the committee content to delegate responsibility to me, as convener, to agree that report on behalf of the committee?
Members indicated agreement.
Thank you very much. That concludes our consideration of the order. I thank the minister and his officials.
That concludes the public part of our proceedings. The committee will now move into private session to consider its final agenda items.
12:17 Meeting continued in private until 12:37.