Chamber and committees

That is a welcome clarification. I do not mean this as a criticism of Councillor Hagmann, but, having met her and COSLA on several occasions recently and discussed issues related to this, I was not aware that she, on behalf of the joint working group, is trying to identify points of potential agreement between the parties. It is useful to hear the clarification, given that most of the parties’ finance spokespersons are in this room, that that is one of the purposes of the discussions and that they feed back up to the joint working group.

For absolute clarity, given what you said about the lead-up to the election, is it not your expectation that any substantial reform will take place ahead of the election? There may be reforms around the edges, such as the one that we mentioned on second and empty homes, but it sounds like you are saying that there will not be progress, or even agreement, on this side of the election about things that have been raised before, such as revaluation.

Just to clarify, are you saying that, timescale and context aside, given the consideration that took place last year, the Government recognises that there is potential value to that policy? Should the right circumstances come about—the right economic context and wider UK tax context—is there potential to introduce that policy in recognition of its value?

That would be really helpful. This might be something for the letter, but can you confirm whether there is a timescale attached to that hub? I think that it is exactly what is required.

I accept that there is an element of tension—after all, universities, unlike colleges, are independent institutions—but can you confirm that it is the Scottish Government’s view that it is an unacceptable level of risk for an institution to be existentially dependent on tuition fees from students from any particular nation?

The local authority has written to the Scottish Government. I apologise, but I cannot remember whether the letter was directed to you or to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Thank you.

I have one final question—

Turning to colleges, I note that, in your letter to the committee a couple of weeks ago, you referred to colleges diversifying their income streams and increasing the income and revenue that they get outwith the SFC grant. I think that that is entirely legitimate and sensible. Indeed, in my region, Ayrshire College and NHS Ayrshire and Arran have a fantastic partnership, with a lot of the training needs for the local health service delivered through the college. That sort of thing could be expanded nationally. Can you outline the Scottish Government’s aspirations for the sector?

I think that that also points to the wider feedback that we have been getting for years from the college sector that it wants much more direction from Government, as this is an area where more direction would be helpful. Does the Government have an objective in that respect, whether it be cash-terms targets or a percentage of overall revenue? What exactly are you aiming for colleges to achieve in terms of income generation beyond the SFC grant?

Good morning. In the first instance, I return to Willie Rennie’s question about international students and university finance. I presume that the Scottish Government would agree that it is an unacceptable risk for any individual institution to be existentially dependent on tuition fees from students from one particular country, but that is currently the case, as a couple of institutions are dependent on international students from China in particular.

Whether it be through supporting individual institutions to diversify income streams or a wider reform of student funding and funding of universities, has the Government set itself an objective of supporting the university sector to ensure that, in three or five years from now, say, or on whatever timescale is set, no institution in Scotland will be financially existentially dependent on international students from any particular country?

I have one question for the cabinet secretary on the learning estate investment programme but, before that, I will finish off on college capital funding. The college capital allocation for the current financial year—not what is in the draft budget—reflects the 20 per cent cut that came down from the previous UK Government. That cut is now largely being reversed. In other areas in the draft budget for 2025-26, there is significant relief, restoration of funding and so on.

Not unreasonably, colleges expected to get part of that and to get their fair share of that relief for the capital budget, but that is not what has been allocated. Setting aside the money for the Dunfermline campus, the college capital budget is essentially flat—there is a very small real-terms increase. Why have colleges not benefited from that relief for the capital allocation when many other areas of the Government budget have?