Chamber and committees

Does the cabinet secretary agree with the recent statement by Sir Anton Muscatelli of the University of Glasgow, who said that

“By restricting student visas, the UK is endangering its world-class university sector”?

It is time to stop the senseless self-harm to our economy and to focus on our national assets. To have a discriminatory visa system that is designed to satisfy the extreme prejudice of the anti-immigration lobby is an act of colossal self-harm. Surely what we need is to encourage more undergraduate and graduate students by removing all visa impediments.

To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to address any issues regarding the implementation of the presumption of mainstreaming, as set out in the recent Education, Children and Young People Committee report on its inquiry into additional support for learning. (S6O-03533)

I have been contacted by a number of constituents in recent weeks regarding placement requests that have been considered, then refused, by the local authority. One of the frustrations of my constituents that is highlighted in the committee’s report is the lack of information that is provided in refusal letters, as well as the lack of information for parents as to how their children’s learning and support needs would be accommodated in mainstream education. The committee’s report recommends that the code of practice and the ASL action plan be updated to require local authorities to

“clearly set out to parents and carers the grounds for refusal”

and, crucially,

“what support is being made available to their child”.

Will the cabinet secretary confirm that she will work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and other agencies to ensure that those updates are made swiftly?

Mark, do you have any final comments?

Good morning. I want to talk about infrastructure. We have had a few considerations around that and Audit Scotland referred to it in a recent report. The Scottish Funding Council recently updated its own plans. We had hoped that the Scottish Government would be able to provide an updated infrastructure investment plan, but that has been delayed by the UK civil service because of the UK general election, so the picture is slightly different. We also know that the cuts to capital expenditure over the next five years are forecast to be 20 per cent in real terms. Mark MacPherson, I know that your report referenced the increase in capital expenditure by the Scottish Government that we have evidence of in recent years, such as year-end 2022-23 and year-end 2023-24.

Given that picture, I would like to hear your reflections on where we are with the real need to deliver a sustainable college estate. I will come to you first, Mark MacPherson.

Thank you. I think that we will come on to that.

You alluded to that earlier, and I know that we have danced around the issue.

This is my last question. I appreciate that Mary Senior and Ellie Gomersall might want to come in on my previous question as well. Our discussions today have been nearside with regard to what is happening in the UK and the differences in Scotland, but the issue of how to fund higher education is not unique to here. Many other countries have wrestled with issues such as how to incentivise international students and retain domestic students while maintaining fairness, parity and so on. To what extent is this discussion being forced over the longer term by the UK Government’s decision to introduce a fees system that is different from the Scottish Government’s system? As Ellie Gomersall pointed out, we have arrived at a certain position in Scotland.

I know that we might not want to start from where we currently are. Nonetheless, if we were looking internationally at other funding models, which ones might we consider? The UK—or, rather, England, with its tuition fees—is anomalous relative to what other countries do. In a multitude of other countries, for example, international students can study free of charge.

I am interested in hearing from Dr Conlon, in particular, because of your background. If we were not starting from here, what might we be able to do? I am quite concerned that we are looking just at the recent history and development.

I have asked Dr Conlon to comment, but I appreciate that the others will want to come in. I will bring you in, too.

I appreciate that this has already been quite a wide-ranging discussion, but I want to offer Ellie Gomersall and Mary Senior the chance to come in, too. Ellie Gomersall, you might have some reflections on the international aspect, due to your role.

That is helpful. I will play that back, so that I am clear on that. Then I will bring in Mark MacPherson.

I think that we are using the two terms differently. You are pointing out a straight alignment, potentially with local businesses, in which course provision is predicated on what they might assess as their needs at that time. I am making a wider point about—this is where I want clarification—how being fleet of foot in course provision can bring economic benefit. Take net zero and some of the skills that we might need for that. Businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, might not have necessarily understood yet what they need, but we might know that at an academic level. Are you making that distinction? Do you understand the economic benefit?

I ask David Belsey to reflect on that and on the wider impact of the cuts. What is your thinking, from an infrastructure perspective, on how we can get to a sustainable college estate, bearing in mind the cuts that I have set out?