Contents
- Attendance
- Subordinate Legislation
- European Union Reporter
European Union Reporter
Agenda item 4 is consideration of paper 3, which is an update from the committee’s European Union reporter, Gillian Martin. I understand that Gillian wants to say a few words.
Yes. Thank you, convener.
Members have my report in front of them.
I thank North East Scotland College for everything that it did for us the other week when we visited Peterhead. I know how much effort goes into organising such visits. We all found the visit worth while.
It was no surprise to committee members that one of the main themes raised at the visit was uncertainty over Brexit.
Funding for fishermen training at the Scottish Maritime Academy largely comes from the EU. There is no clarity about how that funding will be replaced or the extent of the impact that its removal will have.
The EU27 students whom Ross Greer and I met told us that they had no idea what the future holds and that they had had little or no contact from the United Kingdom Government or their embassies. In fact, the only information that they had received about Brexit was information from the Scottish Government on tuition fees.
The figures on EU27 students applying to study in Scotland are covered in paper 3. I am pleased to report that there has not been a notable dip in the numbers. I imagine that the Scottish Government’s funding of tuition fees may well have influenced that.
The report also includes information on Erasmus+. I ask the clerks to ensure that members receive the report that is to be published in March by the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee for this committee’s on-going interest in the area.
12:15
Thank you very much.
On page 1 of paper 3, it is suggested
“that the Convener write back to the Finance and Constitution Committee noting”
the
“lack of overlap”
in the areas highlighted and indicating that we have no plans to undertake work in those areas. The paper continues:
“The Committee will, however, continue to monitor wider EU issues such as the scope for participation in Erasmus+ after Brexit, numbers of EU27 students applying to Scottish HEIs etc.”
I confirm that the clerks will do the work that you have asked them to undertake.
Do committee members have any comments on the recommendations?
I agree with the recommendations and thank Gillian Martin for her paper, which was really interesting.
I do not know about other members here, but I certainly did not want to leave the European Union. I recognise that the funding of European students was necessary. At the time, I remember Mike Russell saying that it was his obligation to provide that funding. Maybe Gillian Martin cannot speak for the Government on the issue, but does she have any sense from the conversations that she has had about whether the presumption is that we will fund EU students as long as we are in the European Union? Perhaps we do not have any choice in the matter, and we must simply do that. Do you have any sense of what would happen if we end up leaving?
That question is for the Government rather than for me.
I am just interested to know whether you picked up that issue in any of your conversations.
My impression from the students whom we met—I am sure that Ross Greer will agree with this—was that the extension to the funding was very welcome. We asked the students whether they had family members who had been planning to move over here, but had decided not to as a result of Brexit. The results were mixed. Some said that they were not moving along their plans, but were waiting to see what happens. However, the fact that we are still making them feel welcome to study here will mean that they will decide to do so.
I think that we are doing all the right things. My impression is that the funding is a desire, not an obligation.
As there are no further comments, are members content for the European Union reporter to pursue the action points on behalf of the committee?
Members indicated agreement.
Meeting closed at 12:18.Air ais
Subordinate Legislation