Seòmar agus comataidhean

That would be great.

My second question is somewhat related to that, because it is on the costs of concessionary travel. To some extent, we are in the early stages of the under-22 concessionary travel scheme. It has been in operation for only a couple of years and we are still learning about the demand. It has been pretty consistent, year on year, that we have needed an in-year allocation to that budget line to cover the costs of the scheme, because demand has been higher than expected. Given that that has been the case for a couple of years in a row, as far as I recall, what work is being done to re-evaluate the methodology for projecting demand for concessionary travel? It seems that we have been pretty consistently underestimating it.

I will start with questions on specifics. You might have to add the answers to the list of details to come back to the committee with, if that is okay.

First, on support for bus services, I note that there is a £5 million reduction in that budget line, but I could not find a narrative explanation for that. I was a bit surprised, given that bus services in Scotland continue to decline and we lose routes regularly. Was that money reallocated on the basis of there being a lack of demand for that support, or was it reallocated because there was a need to cover costs elsewhere in the transport portfolio? I am thinking about the increase in concessionary travel costs, for example.

I am sorry to interrupt, but my understanding is that the support for bus services budget line is to support operators to run routes, which is distinct from covering the costs of concessionary travel. The support for services budget line has gone down by £5 million while services are being lost, so I wonder whether that is because operators did not want that support—because they wanted to end services—or because the money needed to be moved into, for example, the concessionary travel budget line.

I understand that this is not part of any of your portfolios, but, given that just under £30 million, I think, has had to go into concessionary travel again, and given that that has been pretty consistent year on year, it might be worth interrogating Transport Scotland’s methodology. If it is a consistent in-year allocation, it might just be a case of adjusting the methodology and allocating the money better at the start of the year.

Going back to the SQA increase that the convener mentioned, I note, minister, that you indicated that the Government is looking into that. Again, this is a recurring story. Can you share with us what you mean by “looking into that”? Is a specific exercise under way?

That would be great—thank you.

Lydia, are there any examples from UHI of how you address the housing issue, given that the rural context makes it significantly different? Glasgow offers a great example of widening access for estranged young people, but urban and rural contexts for housing and student accommodation are very different.

The witnesses may have caught my last question towards the end of the session with the commissioner for fair access. It was on student access to housing, which is a significant barrier in the context of the widening access agenda. Some universities have done a lot of work on that, particularly for care-experienced and estranged young people.

Claire, are you aware of any wider work in the sector to address the housing issues that students from backgrounds that are considered to fall under the widening access agenda have experienced and of how those issues have been resolved?

That would be great, and it is much appreciated. Thank you very much. That is all from me, convener.

Good morning, John.

Earlier, you mentioned that students have to exist while they are at university, and you mentioned all the other factors that have a significant impact on their ability to get there in the first place and then to complete their studies. I am interested in the housing situation, in particular, and in hearing about any work that you have done on that and evidence that you have gathered on it, particularly in the light of the point that was made by Miles Briggs about care-experienced young people, who often have difficulties in accessing housing and accommodation when they are at university.

The Scottish Government’s programme for government in the previous years of this session contained a commitment to a guarantor scheme for estranged young people and students, in particular. That is not present in the most recent programme for government, so I presume that the Government no longer intends to progress it. What impact are you aware of on the ability of students, particularly those who are estranged from their families, who are care-experienced and so on, to complete their studies as a result of their inability to access housing and the lack of a guarantor who can help them with that?

I have one final question, which that segues into really nicely: it is about young people and learners.

You spoke about setting up your new schools unit to have a more direct line of communication, which I think is excellent. As you might have heard, one of the questions that I asked Fiona Robertson and the cabinet secretary when they were before us was about the challenges of not having a system in place whereby you can directly contact every learner. In the higher history situation, there was no mechanism by which you could have contacted everyone who took the exam to explain to them what subsequently went on.

Are there any on-going discussions about creating some kind of direct communication tool, or using existing tools in the system, so that you can have a direct line of contact? As it filters through councils, schools and so on, the key information very often does not get to learners. Given what you have just said, the first that they hear of a situation is often, unfortunately, in the media or on social media, and the information is often not presented accurately.

That is all incredibly useful.

I do not want to reopen the specifics of the higher history situation—I think that we have exhausted that this morning—but it is an example of the board’s involvement in specific situations as they arise. In relation to higher history, what has gone to the board, and what discussions has the board had? Has it given the organisation direction in how it has responded at any point in the process?