Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not know whether officials will be able to answer that, but it is a little unfair to ask me whether I was on target to do that when I was not serving in my current role at that time.

It is imperative to understand that the financial climate that we exist in is markedly different from that which existed in 2021. That is why Governments across the world have struggled to meet demand. We in Scotland have been consistently clear in meeting, for example, the demands of the trade unions for higher public sector wages. It is important that we have delivered record salaries for teachers, and I stand by that. However, there have been consequences across the portfolio.

No, not necessarily. The briefing that Colleges Scotland has provided explains that external factors—not least, the increases in inflation and in employer national insurance contributions—have contributed to a much more challenging landscape for the sector. We have responded to that by providing a significant uplift.

We have also been engaging with the sector throughout the year. Mr Macpherson has been leading on that work, and I have been engaging directly with Colleges Scotland and with individual institutions. We wanted to ensure that this year’s budget provided an uplift. I think that the uplift has been welcomed by the sector, and we are keen to work with the Scottish Funding Council to ensure that it is distributed to those that need the help and support from the Government that has been provided for in the budget.

I am just gesticulating to my official to say that, from my recollection, there was an uplift in funding for colleges last year, so I am not sure that I accept that—

I cannot comment on other portfolios. I am not sure that that is accurate, but, having listened to the exchange, I think that it would be worth while us writing to the committee following today’s evidence session. I very much want to assure the sector. We are talking about welcome additional investment. I hear the points that Mr Mason has made, and I think that we need to reflect on the ways in which we communicate the data as a Government.

I will come back to you on that, if that is okay, convener, because I will be writing to you anyway with further information. That will allow me to set out the position in much clearer detail than has been documented thus far.

I think that that is a fair observation. I am not going to give you full details of how I may or may not lobby the finance secretary, but you can be assured that, every year, I put my case to her and she listens. This year, we have seen an uplift for colleges, which I think is welcome.

Mr Macpherson and I have been live to the challenges of the sector. I accept the points that the convener made at the beginning of the session. The challenges that the sector has been experiencing will not be resolved in a one-year settlement, and I accept that they will not be fully resolved in a one-year settlement this year. That is why the conditionality that is attached to the funding in relation to reform and sustainable growth is so important. We should not divorce those two aspects, as they are inherently linked.

Shirley Laing or Mr Macpherson will correct me if I am wrong on this, but I do not think that the autumn deadline precludes us from acting more urgently in this space up to that time, should an institution require additional support. Ministers are updated regularly in relation to individual challenges. We are across that detail, because the Scottish Funding Council provides us with advice on it. It is not that we are not able to act in the interim period—I want to give some reassurance on that point. We can respond as and when there are challenges in year, and the SFC does respond appropriately with additionality and assistance.

I accept that there have been challenges, but, more broadly, we need to be mindful that the college estate is not in the gift of ministers. We do not own the college estate. I would compare that, for example, with the school estate, where we have managed to put in significant investment through the learning estate investment programme and have transformed the quality of the school estate through dual investment with local authority partners. That has worked extremely well.

In colleges, it is quite different. Mr Macpherson talked about some of the challenges that the SFC has to take forward with individual institutions, while analysing the needs of those institutions. It is not quite the same as the uplift approach that we use in schools, so there is no doubt that there have been challenges. However, the inflationary pressures have played a role in that regard, as things have become much more challenging.

From memory, in late 2022, the RAAC issues would not have been as present as they became because of the issues that were unearthed probably in September 2023, when the extent of RAAC across the country—across the United Kingdom—became known.

I do not diminish what you are saying, convener, but those external effects have had an impact in relation to the pace of change. It is worth recording that we now have the additionality that is needed to move forward. I am pleased that we will be working with the SFC on providing the support that Mr Briggs rightly speaks to, particularly in relation to those individual institutions that are currently in need.

As I understand it, the plan will be supported by the investment that we have put in in relation to the budget—it is the capital uplift.

Shirley, do you want to come in?

I see that Shirley Laing wants to come in, but my understanding is that it is a significant change to our view of how we provide funding to the college sector. I am not shying away from Mr Rennie’s point, but we do not have a lot of detail to share other than what was shared in the chamber last week. We are working up plans and working with the SFC on how the money will be distributed.

We are looking at radical steps. This is cross-Government work: Ms Somerville leads the work on tackling child poverty, but every portfolio has been asked to make a contribution. We in education have therefore been thinking about what we could do. Mr Rennie is quite right to talk about the role of colleges in tackling poverty in communities; they are rooted in some of our poorest communities, which offers us an opportunity to provide shared services. For example, many local colleges have childcare provision, but there are ways in which we could strengthen that, and that is what this budget allocation is about.

The reason why we have not focused on that today is that we do not have concrete plans to share with the committee other than those that were shared last week. It is a radical shift—I see that Shirley Laing would like to say more on that point. I recognise Mr Rennie’s point, because we are shifting away from ways that we might have funded the sector in the past.

My view—I will check that my minister is content with this—is that the funding very much has to support transformation; it cannot be about plugging holes. We have been really clear throughout our engagement with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government on that point. She has also been clear with us that if this additionality is going to be protected from the centre of Government, the college sector has to play a role in public service reform. We see transformation as being very much tied to the funding, as opposed to the funding being used to plug holes, as it were, for one financial year, which is not my understanding of the way that we will administer the funding and how we will support that kind of change in the sector.

Mr Macpherson, I do not want to speak on your behalf.