Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not want to avoid answering the first question but, as the member knows, I am a great believer in empowering the colleges to have and deliver that vision, rather than ministers dictating what it should look like.

From my visit to Glasgow yesterday, it was clear that a coherent vision of the needs of the city and the wider area is being pulled together. I was heartened by some of what is already happening—in particular, when it comes to centres of excellence. There is already something there that will be built on, and I have every confidence that it will align with what that locality requires and that it will provide an example for other parts of the country of how to co-operate and collaborate. That was heartening.

On the question about the moneys that will be raised, the member is quite right to talk about the top slicing that took place in order to fund GCRB. My understanding—Jess Dolan will correct me if I am wrong—is that a top slice of a sort has been retained for 2025-26, which is to cover any residual costs that are incurred in winding up the regional body.

We anticipate that anything that is left at the conclusion of that process would be returned to the colleges in November. Therefore, we are already starting to see the financial benefit of the change. You will appreciate that we have to complete the winding-up process, which should be done by November.

If you know me, you will know that I would work at a considerably greater pace on everything if I could.

There were two complicating factors, one of which was down to me. As I said, I wanted to be satisfied that, if we removed the level of oversight that the regional strategic bodies have provided, we would not get into a situation in which there would be predatory and competitive behaviour. I took a little bit of time to consider that—in fact, I met all the chairs and principals in order to iron out those points.

The other complicating factor was that the Withers report came along in the midst of that process. We wanted to be assured—

I am not making excuses, but I have been in post for only two years. I recall that, as we were working through the process, we wanted to test the advice that we had received from the SFC. We wanted to know whether, given what James Withers was asking for, what was in that advice was still the SFC’s view.

You will also be aware, as it was alluded to earlier, that there has been some contention, such as complaints and so on, around college activity in the city of Glasgow. All round, we probably took longer than I would have wanted us to, but I wanted to be sure that we got it right, which I think we have in the end.

If you look at some of the evidence that the committee heard, you will see that organisations have said that they have immediate concerns, but can see the potential merits in the bill. When the Withers report was published, there was widespread support inside and outwith Parliament for what he proposed. Withers wanted us to go further and expressed the merits of moving to a single funding body, but I have taken the view that that would be too big a leap at the moment. I am sure that we will go on to explore the various reasons why the change is necessary, but there is support out there.

I do not entirely accept that description. A number of things were done on the back of the review. For example, there is currently a pilot online application service for students to apply for disabled students allowance, which is on track to be rolled out this year. Some work has been done on updating the student portal. However, I accept that there have been issues. I hope that those who might be viewing that element of the consultation with a degree of cynicism recognise that I would not commit to it if I were not serious about delivering on it. I am keen that we engage properly on this.

There are a number of areas. We have done well with care-experienced students, but we can perhaps do better. You and I have previously discussed apprenticeships, Ms Duncan-Glancy. I am not convinced that we are doing enough in that space. It is my commitment, in the year that I have remaining in the Parliament, to do as much as I can to identify what more might be required. That should be informed by the lived experience of those who have gone through the system or are attempting to navigate the system.

We are always looking at what works elsewhere. I know that my officials have been talking to their counterparts in the UK, Wales and Northern Ireland Governments, but the set-ups are not comparable. A fundamental change would be required, perhaps through primary legislation, in order to enable us to do that, which is the frustration here.

The reality is that I am trying to exhaust all the options to see whether we can do this. In reality, given the time that is left in this parliamentary session, it is pretty unlikely that primary legislation could be passed before the conclusion of the session, so it might fall to the next one. However, we hope that we could get in such a measure before that, because of the 2026 target and the 2030 target.

My reference to resources was more in the context of comments that were made at last week’s meeting. Others talked about the resource that would be involved.

There is a resource point but, if it reassures you to hear that resource is not a barrier to introducing the measure, I would just say to you that I do not think that we have costed what this would cost us. That has not been foremost in our thinking; foremost in our thinking has been how we could introduce it, because we see the benefits of it.

My understanding is that the review is just getting started. We are providing some analytical resource to support that. We are talking about a matter of a few months, because we will have to come to conclusions. I do not have specific timescales right now, but it is a matter of urgency, for obvious reasons.

It is more than that. For example, we are all aware of the issue of getting young women into careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The University of Edinburgh sends its STEM undergraduates into primary and secondary schools around Edinburgh and the Lothians to actively engage with young women in those schools to encourage them down that path. That is the type of activity that I am talking about, and it is not always publicly recognised. Our universities do fantastic work in this space, and we should be ready to acknowledge that.