³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

One would be concerned if reserves were being banked just for the purpose of having them, but I suspect that some of the universities that you talk about are investing incredibly heavily in a variety of ways. I would be concerned about excessive reserves, but we need to look calmly at the situation and at what universities are delivering.

Indeed—I was shocked. [Laughter.]

I spoke to Sir Peter last night, and we talked about that in detail. He was trying to make a helpful contribution to the debate. I understand entirely where he is coming from, but his central premise is wrong. The number of Scotland-domiciled students who go to university in England has come down. There is not an increase; it has come down. I will write to you with the figure on that.

Anecdotally, I do not doubt that Sir Peter is aware of certain cases. The central premise of the argument that he advanced is flawed, though. Nevertheless, of course people will hold different views on tuition fees. Your party holds different views from mine, Mr Kerr. The SNP fundamentally believes that a person’s ability to learn, as opposed to their ability to pay for it, should determine their opportunity to go to university.

Another aspect that been a little lost in the discussion that followed that was that it is not simply about saying that certain students would have to pay tuition fees, as Sir Peter argued for in relation to those from wealthier families. They would have loan repayments as well, so it would involve substantial sums of money.

You are entitled to hold a view, Mr Kerr, and Mr Rennie’s party will have a view. I am sorry to intrude upon Mr Rennie’s grief about tuition fees. We hold to a view, which I am happy to defend. However, I am also happy to talk to people such as Sir Peter, who is a deeply respected individual. As I said, we discussed the matter last night. I will not share what we discussed, but it was a constructive conversation.

The convener has hit the nail on the head in that this is principally about the teachers’ pay settlement. Members will recall that the former Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills indicated at this committee in February that the moneys owing to the teachers’ pay settlement would have to come from within the education budget. That is principally what is at play here. There are always pressures on portfolio budgets at a variety of times, but that is the principal one that led to our taking this regrettable decision.

Mr Doris, I think that you and others are well aware that the financial challenges that are faced by the education portfolio are replicated across Government. As a consequence of issues outwith our control, the Scottish Government’s budget has suffered a significant hit. The public finances face what is probably the biggest challenge since devolution, so it is not the case that we can ask other portfolios to transfer money across to education—I wish that it were—because there are challenges for all areas of Government and we have to get through this in the best way that we can.

I am entirely aware of City of Glasgow College’s situation, both from the trade union perspective and from that of the principal. We need to be clear that the actions taken by City of Glasgow College are not linked to the £26 million, which was intended for transition purposes. That was being discussed with the Scottish Funding Council. However, I recognise that a flat cash settlement for colleges creates challenges. You will appreciate that colleges are stand-alone institutions and will react to situations individually. I recognise that the situation in the City of Glasgow College is particularly difficult, and I will meet the unions in due course. However, I am very clear that that situation is linked not to the £26 million but to wider issues in the college sector.

I think that I am meeting Unite very shortly. I met the Educational Institute of Scotland Further Education Lecturers’ Association, EIS-FELA, last week. That is all in the pipeline.

I recognise that.

The £26 million was only for 2023-24—that was what was on the table. The other thing that I should say is that since 2012-13, the actual resource budget afforded to colleges has increased by over £168 million in cash terms. I recognise the pressures that colleges will have faced over that period, but the budget has increased.

Demand has increased, too, and inflation is putting pressure on everything else that we know about. That is why the exercise that we are currently engaged in with the colleges is so important. It is looking at how we make them more sustainable, and I assure you that that is what is driving the discussions.

Mr Doris, I cannot sit here today and say that there will be Barnett consequentials or more money available, let alone that, if such became available, it could be recurring over the next two, three, four or five years. It would be impossible to say that. What I can say to you is that, from our perspective—and contrary to how they might be feeling right now, given what has happened—colleges are very much at the heart of what we are planning for the coming years. Where it is at all possible, we will look to support them to that end through the budget.

Let us deal in facts. In 2021-22, there were 322,332 enrolments at Scottish colleges—an increase of 16 per cent since 2019-20. Colleges delivered 129,559 full-time-equivalent places, which is an increase of 0.5 per cent since 2020-21. A substantial amount of money is put into colleges for student support—£135 million is maintained—because of the very poverty challenges that you are talking about. We have directed a lot of that funding to students from the poorer areas, but my point with regard to funding—