Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not want to get into the depths of this, but I would just point out that the SFC did not see Dundee coming, and it has missed the opportunity in many other problem areas.

The apprenticeship funding will be dwarfed by college and university funding. Can we be confident that, when the spotlight is off, the leadership of the organisation will treat apprenticeships with the priority that they deserve and which they currently get within SDS?

The spotlight on you will be off, too.

If the minister says, “Before stage 1”, I would just say yes.

I have expressed quite clear support for the Withers review and the process in Parliament, and I have been overwhelmed by two things: the strength of opposition to, and the timidity of support for, the bill. The minister will have seen and heard the evidence sessions; in summary, it was said in evidence that the bill is a costly distraction from the challenges that are ahead and potentially breaks the relationship with employers. The convener has covered that point, and you might wish to come back on it, but I just wanted to state my summary of the evidence.

I want to focus on something a bit different. Can the Scottish Funding Council cope with this change? When the previous interim chief executive, now chief operating officer, came before the committee, he was less than convincing; in fact, he had to write to us again to clarify what he should have said at the meeting. Not so long ago, he was in charge of the SFC. We have had the crisis at the University of Dundee, to which we still do not have a resolution, and universities and colleges throughout Scotland are facing financial problems. Can that organisation cope? The minister says that it will be a new organisation, but is the SFC capable of creating a new organisation with all of that going on?

The truth is that the SFC did not spot anything.

You have made my point for me. You have just described a lot of inquiries and potential changes to powers and responsibilities, but at the same time you are seeking to transfer responsibility for delivering a service, instead of commissioning or transferring funds to other bodies to deliver that service. It is a different type of function. The SDS delivers the apprenticeships model, while colleges and universities deliver something else with their college and university funding. We are talking about a different model and set-up, and it will be dwarfed by college and university funding.

Given all that context, do apprenticeships have any hope of getting priority, even if ministers think that they are important? You need somebody to champion apprenticeships, as the chief executive of SDS currently does, to ensure that they get the all-year-round support that they deserve and need, for the reasons that you have set out.

You have made the point that there is a lot going on in colleges and universities. Thinking of all the transfers that are going on, why are we shifting something when such a shift is opposed by many people, and its supporters are tepid in their support?

That might touch on one of the solutions. Partly, our amendments are trying to remove the ability to delay, because that exacerbates the problem. I do not know whether that is what the cabinet secretary is thinking about as a solution to the problem.

I will conclude at that point, because I am keen to hear what the minister has to say.

Meghan Gallacher and Fulton MacGregor have set out the case in relation to the problem that churches and religious groups are not natural persons but are groups of people, which means that the bulk of the criteria that have been set out do not apply to them. My amendment 452 seeks to include all religious groups, rather than only the Church of Scotland, as Meghan Gallacher proposes. Fulton MacGregor’s proposal to include an additional criterion is also a sensible way to solve the problem.

The main problem is that there are manses that are potentially not getting used because congregations and other religious groups fear that they will not be able to get those properties back when they need them. We need to try to solve that problem.

I know that the cabinet secretary will not accept my amendment, although I do not know what she will do with the other amendments. I would like to hear from her what she intends to do about that problem, because it is a real issue, and whether she thinks that section 24 exacerbates the problem. Church of Scotland congregations are fearful about letting out the manses on a short-term basis because they fear that they will not be able to get them back when they need them. I would like to understand what the cabinet secretary and the Government are going to do to improve communication and the application of information.

Why can we not do that now?

Paul Campbell will have seen the extensive criticism not just from the Withers report but from Audit Scotland. What is your response to that criticism?

That is an indication that you are satisfied with the status quo, though. You said that those things are closely aligned.