Chamber and committees

I very much agree on the importance of Dundee university—I should say that as a Fife MSP. There is a joint campus in Kirkcaldy for nursing, so there is close working with the university. A number of my constituents study at the university and, as an Angus MSP, that will be exactly the same for Mr Dey.

I do not diminish the importance of the university, particularly its geographic importance. We have talked a lot about the international student population, but the university as an institution is also hugely important to those who live in Angus, Fife and the surrounding areas. We will do all that we can to facilitate support via the auspices of the SFC.

Mr Marra quoted some figures, but I do not have the details of those in front of me. I do not know whether those have been shared with Mr Dey. We need to be very careful about speculating, as Mr Dey has outlined. However, as Mr Dey alluded to, we will be absolutely transparent with the committee with regard to the report—or the action plan—that comes forward. It is important for members, particularly for local members, to have sight of the detail and an understanding of what happened. Ministers also want to be reassured in relation to that detail.

I accept the member’s challenge. On a point of principle, though, the minister and I will not agree with him about tuition fees—

I think that the committee will be aware that I wrote to the UK Government on that issue on 21 November. If the committee is not aware of that correspondence, I am happy to share details of it. The UK Government has not yet responded to it.

Of course, it is not just colleges and universities that will be impacted by the national insurance changes. We have forecasts on the issue, which are all initial estimates of how the changes might impact on my portfolio area. For children and social care, the figure is £4 million. For early learning and childcare, it is potentially £5 million. For universities, it is £45 million—although universities are excluded, they will, of course, need additional assistance, and my letter seeks to address that. For colleges, the estimate is sitting at around £20 million, although we are working with the Scottish Funding Council on some of the figures. Those are estimates, because we do not yet know how the UK Government will implement the changes to national insurance contributions. We do not yet have certainty on that, and the issue is creating a lot of uncertainty across the education sector.

I realise that your question is on colleges and universities, but the changes have potentially dire implications in other parts of my portfolio. We are seeking clarity from the UK Government. This is not just a matter for my portfolio; it is an issue across Government. I think that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government is currently leading on that work across Government. I am particularly concerned about the implications for the education and skills portfolio, because the changes, which we did not know were coming, will potentially have really serious implications for a number of areas of our education system.

Without clarity, it is difficult for us to give any further certainty beyond where we are at the current time. As and when I receive a response from the UK Government—I should point out that my letter was sent on 21 November—I will be happy to share that with the committee. The issue is very concerning, given some of the challenges that the changes will create.

Neil Rennick might want to speak about the broader work that we have undertaken.

In my negotiations with the cabinet secretary for finance, I asked for additionality for ASN and additionality for teacher numbers—again, an ask that was delivered on. I am pretty clear that this is a good settlement for education and skills, and it sees a 3 per cent increase in real terms for the portfolio more broadly. I hope that that will be welcomed.

That is a rather broad question, convener. Of course, child poverty is not—

You have to be mindful of the context in which we exist.

I should also have mentioned the early adopter communities, which will help to inform some of the evaluation that Andrew Watson just spoke about. Those communities are giving us data on what works and are helping us to inform what comes next, and the delivery approaches that they have been taking are already showing signs of real progress.

Forgive me, but I believe that the solution in England and Wales has been to increase tuition fees. I do not think that that is something to be considered in Scotland as we have a policy of funding free tuition.

The £130 million is for the pupil equity fund.

Next year, the Scottish attainment challenge will be 10 years old. It was announced by Nicola Sturgeon, the previous First Minister, some time ago. It is part of our wider aspiration as a Government to eradicate child poverty, which is the point that the convener made at the start of the meeting. That funding stream will end in 2026, and the Government will then have to decide what comes next.

My view as cabinet secretary is that that funding stream has become absolutely essential to the way in which schools are now run. I am sure that, like me, committee members are regularly going in and out of schools. I regularly speak to headteachers about the importance of PEF in their schools in empowering them to take decisions and bring in additionality. It is worth my while to remind the committee that PEF supports more than 3,000 extra staff in our schools, of whom approximately 1,000 are teachers. That additionality in Scotland’s schools as a result of the funding stream has been hugely important.

My view is that it needs to remain in place. The decision about what comes next will of course be a matter in 2026 for the next Scottish Government. I hope that that will be my party, but I do not like to prejudge such things as it is a matter for the electorate. However, we need to think more broadly about resourcing and how, post pandemic, we are responding to some of the challenges in our schools.

In my earlier exchanges with the convener, I spoke about the issue of additional support needs and teacher numbers, which was recently discussed in the chamber and which I am sure that we will come on to talk about. It is hugely important that we have a good relationship with local authorities and help to ensure that they are adequately resourced to meet the additional need in our schools, particularly post pandemic. To think about this in a historical sense, some of the needs in our school have changed astronomically compared to when SAC was first introduced. For example, the changes that we have seen in our schools post pandemic mean that the level of need in relation to ASN is different, and that will require different policy solutions in the future.