The next item of business is a debate on motion number 431 in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville on the contribution of colleges and universities to Scotland's success. I invite all members who wish to speak in this debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call on Shirley-Anne Somerville to speak to and move the motion in her name. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I'm delighted to open this debate on the contribution made by our colleges and universities to Scotland's success. As well as this being my first ministerial outing, this is, of course, my first speech to chamber since my rather enforced absence during the last session, so as such can I pay tribute at the beginning to the work of my predecessor in Somfellman, Kara Hilton, and wish her all the best for the future and her best wishes to her and her family. Colleges and universities educate, build confidence, develop skills, encourage innovation and crucially help drive the economic growth that can make Scotland a more prosperous and fairer country. Their contribution promotes Scotland's international standing as a competitive nation based on the skills of our people and the quality of our ideas. I want to focus on two main areas this afternoon. First, I want to emphasise the high value that this Government places equally on colleges and universities and how we work in partnership with both to benefit students, communities, wider society and the economy. I then want to set out the key Government ambitions for further and higher education over the next few years and beyond. I have no doubt that, under the SNP Government, colleges and universities have continued to thrive and evolve, and Scotland students, researchers and employers continue to benefit from that. In 2016-17, the Scottish Government will again make a direct investment of over £1.5 billion in colleges and universities combined. In a period of continued austerity, our direct investment points to the confidence and trust that we have in our tertiary education sector. Elsewhere in the UK, it appears that the market will increasingly determine the fortunes of tertiary education. While we will always work with the UK Government in areas of mutual benefit and to protect Scotland's interest, this Government retains the belief that education is a public good. I do not want to run through a long list of facts and figures, but I think that the following three points illustrate the continued and positive progress that is made by our colleges and universities in recent years. In 2014-15, 97 per cent of learning hours in colleges were delivered on courses that are leading to a recognised qualification. That is an eight-percentage point increase since 2006-07. Placing that emphasis on full-time courses that can lead to employment is an approach that I believe provides our young people in particular with the maximum benefit for their periods of study. Secondly, the number of Scottish domiciled higher education qualifiers from the country's most deprived areas increased by more than 2,300 to 10,395 in 2014-15. That is a rise of 29 per cent. That positive achievement has been delivered by both colleges and universities, and I, for one, am proud of clear progress like that. Further and faster progress must be made, and I will return to that in the work of the commission on widening access specifically in a moment. Finally, I would like to highlight the continuing international renown of our universities and other higher education institutions. Scottish universities have a world-class reputation for research, with 77 per cent of their research assessed as world-leading or internationally excellent in the 2014 research excellence framework exercise. For example, both myself and the Deputy First Minister were privileged to see at first hand the work done on gravitational wave detection at the University of Glasgow by the new chief scientific adviser, Professor Sheill, around only last week. Those achievements could not have been realised and will not be realised further without the strong and durable partnerships formed between the Scottish Government, our colleges and universities and businesses throughout Scotland. There is no doubt that across a number of policy areas. I am grateful to the minister and I welcome her to her position on the front bench. On the point about partnerships, would she agree that the University of the Highlands Islands is a good example of that, because it must be a federal structure involving all the partner institutions within that structure, and would she share my concern about the top slicing of the individual budgets to individual institutions across the UHI that is currently happening by the centre? I do not mean her Government, I mean the centre of the UHI. Shirley-Anne Somerville? Tavish Scott, for that question, is for his welcome. There is no doubt that the University of the Highlands and Islands is in many ways a unique institution, but one that has great positive examples of that to the higher and further education sector can learn from. Yes, there are always challenges for individual budgets for different institutions, but, as he says, that is not a matter directly for the Scottish Government. Now, there is no doubt that across a number of policy areas, our colleges and universities are delivering for Team Scotland. Research commissioned by University Scotland notes that Scotland's universities contributed £7 billion gross value added to Scotland's economy, and the university sector employs 38,000 people directly and supports around 140,000 jobs indirectly. The most recent information available shows that our colleges employ 14,000 people, and our 2015 study commissioned on behalf of Scotland's colleges notes that, for every £1 invested in Scotland's colleges, a return of £6.30 is delivered. I would like to turn now, Presiding Officer, to set out this Government's key priorities for tertiary education during this session. I say at the outset that this Government remains committed to free access to education. We will not impose tuition fees on students, either up front or through the back door, not now, not ever. This girl from a fife mining village, the first in her family to even consider going to university, will not take that very access to free education away, which allows her to stand here today as the Minister for Further and Higher Education. Recently, a variety of commentators have appeared to suggest that ending fee tuition might hold the key to faster progress on widening access to higher education, and that is what the very end of the Tory amendment is all about. However, how asking students to pay fees of up to £27,000, which are charged elsewhere in the UK for a degree course, will make higher education a more attractive option for our young people is something that leaves me utterly baffled in that of the national union for students. In relation to colleges, we have committed to maintaining the number of full-time equivalent places. In doing so, we will ensure that opportunities continue to be available to young people to improve their skills, future employment prospects or progression to future study. There are a number of key items set out in the SNP manifesto that this Government wants to drive progress on even further. Among those priorities are enabling wider access to higher education both at university and at college, reviewing the system of support for students to ensure that they can choose the right course for them and expanding the success of colleges and universities in the part that they play in our strategy for improving youth employment. Turning first to widening access. Throughout efforts such as the creation of access agreements between universities and the SNP, as well as investment in additionally fully funded university places, we have made progress on widening access. However, I know that this Government knows that there is so much more to do. In the near future, we will make a statement on taking forward the recommendations in the report for the commission on widening access. A significant part of that effort will be the recruitment of a dynamic commissioner who can help to drive progress and co-operation between all parties. Achieving fair and equal access to higher education is critical. Full stop, no argument. In fact, during the election campaign, there was a fair degree of consensus across the political parties, with the obvious exception of the Tories, on the need to implement all the commission's recommendations. There is also a recognition in the tertiary education sector that we need to see further improvement. That consensus, that recognition, is something that I intend to use to push on at pace to further widen access and thereby develop the opportunities for our young people. It is right that Parliament debates any Government's progress with this core ambition, but I do believe that this Government is embracing a bold and ambitious agenda for change. Further, I believe that our approach represents the most radical set of actions that has been adopted anywhere in the UK. Turning now to the important matter of student support. In addition to free tuition, Scottish domicile students from lower income families in higher education at university or college and who live at home benefit from the best package of support available in the UK. This Government is committed to maintaining the minimum income guarantee for those students. In 2015-16, we increased the relevant sum to £7,625 by adding another £125 to the maximum bursary. The improvements will continue, and as of the next academic year, eligibility for the maximum level of bursary will broaden to include students from families with a household income of up to £19,000 rather than the current £17,000. We are supporting students taking further education courses with record levels of supports as well. The budget for 2016-17 of over £106 million in college bursaries, child care and discretionary funds, is a real-terms increase of 30 per cent since 2006-07. In 2016-17, further education students will be able to receive a non-repayable bursary, which is the highest level anywhere in the UK. Last year, the Scottish Government worked in tough economic times to increase the maximum higher education bursary available in Scotland. Compare that to the UK Government, who will, from 2016-17, end bursaries entirely for new students going to university. She must surely accept that that was a small increase on a bursary, which had been slashed by 40 per cent by her own Government. Shirley-Anne Somerville? I always think that it is very interesting when you listen to the Labour motions and Labour interventions, because it continuously goes around additional spending, whether it is on higher education, further education, different parts of the education sector, the NHS, whichever the debate parts to be, and it really does appear that they have changed positions within the chamber, but they have not changed their position on anything since the election or got a grip on reality about the tough economic times we are facing. I do not think that I will take any lessons from Ian Gray or the Labour Party on how we should spend our money. I think that the electorate did that fair enough during the election. The SNP manifesto committed to a review of student support in Scotland. That will be taken forward in dialogue with all key partners. It is important that students have the support that they need to access and attend college or university, and that they are clear on all entitlements and means of assistance. We have, over time and with the best of intentions, at each point and over a variety of Governments developed a system that, in further education in particular, is overly complex. That must change for students. When I say students, I mean all students, whether they are straight out of school, returning to education, have dependence, have a disability or experience of the care system and regardless of their age. Turning briefly to our ambitions for skills development and improving prospects of employment, both colleges and universities are essential to our efforts to develop Scotland's young workforce. By continuing to strengthen their engagement with employers, our tertiary education institutions will ensure that the skills of our young people match the requirements of a vibrant economy. We must advance development of a responsive and adaptable learner journey and a wider education system, which is easy to access and easy to move through. That means clear progression routes from school to college, university or training and work, whichever is right for the individual involved. In addition, we must enable closer partnership engagement to meet the needs of industry through the further development and delivery of our skills investment plans. I want to conclude by reinforcing the point that education and access to it and the benefits flowing from it are essential to this Government's priorities. Both individual testimony and hard evidence point to a good education system leading to an increased confidence, wellbeing and productivity for our young people and other learners. Scotland's colleges and universities have been providing learners with opportunities for many years—indeed, in some cases, for hundreds of years—and I want to continue to work with our colleges and universities to ensure that learning is open to everyone who wants access to it and can benefit from its life-changing impact. I would like to ask Parliament to join me in recognising the pivotal contribution of our colleges and universities to Scotland's continuing success, and I move the motion in my name. I now call on Liz Smith to speak to and move amendment 431.1. You have eight minutes, Ms Smith. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I move the amendment in my name? Could I congratulate very warmly the cabinet secretary and his new team? It's very good to see Shirley-Anne Somerville back in the chamber. One of the great privileges I had in the last Parliament was to chair the cross-party group on colleges and universities shortly, I hope, to be reconvened. As everybody knows, CPGs in this Parliament are an opportunity for debate that goes well beyond the party political bubble in this chamber. They are often catalysts for new ideas, often a platform for the relevant sectors to showcase their success, and a source of very detailed information that we all need to be well briefed. Can I take the opportunity to thank all the colleges and universities for what they have contributed to the life of this Parliament, but more importantly to Scotland? Ahead of this debate, not only have we been very well briefed by colleges Scotland and by universities Scotland, but also by very many individual institutions. I don't think that any of us could deny that their work is very impressive. Those two sectors combined and, of course, increasingly integrated encompass some of the finest institutions in the land, but I suspect that the cabinet secretary and his team are well aware that, beside their undoubted success, they have in recent years felt a little bit under siege, such as being the extent of the challenges that they are facing in the global environment, in educational progress, particularly when it comes to the attainment gap and widening access, securing closer links with business and industry, and ensuring that their campuses are fit for the 21st century. I also suspect that they will be telling the cabinet secretary that they would like a little bit of peace. They want to be able to get on with the job that they do pretty well and have, in some cases, for hundreds of years, without constantly having the Government telling them what to do. Notwithstanding the fact that it is very important to ensure that these institutions are fully accountable for the very large sums of public money that universities encourage—yes, of course—John Swinney. I wonder if Liz Smith would clarify a point for me. She made on a mark a moment ago, which was raising the issue of university business cooperation. She went on to say that the Government should step back from encouraging universities to do certain things. Was she including encouraging more university and business collaboration in the list of things that the Government should stop asking universities to do? Liz Smith? Absolutly not, Cabinet Secretary, but I think that the Cabinet Secretary will recognise that, in the past year or so, colleges and universities have felt pressurised by the Scottish Government. I do not think that even the Cabinet Secretary would say that the recent university governance bill was the finest moment for the SNP. I listened carefully to what the minister said about ambitions. I accept, though I do not agree with the fact that the Scottish Government is looking to encourage the fact that it wants to continue having free higher education, although, of course, it is not free. However, I want to ask the Scottish Government this afternoon that, if it is the ambition to widen access by 20 per cent to deprived communities by the year 2030, it could tell the Scottish Parliament whether that means that it will find more places in universities or if it is unable to find new places because of funding constraints, whether it is going to find a situation that will squeeze out some of the students that would normally have that university entrance. I think that that is an important part of the debate. As I said, it is a perfectly rational line to take that the Government will fund university education. We on this side of the chamber do not agree with that because we believe that the pressure is on either to find more spaces, because it is a very important thing if you want to widen access, to make sure that you can fund it adequately. However, if that is not the intention, I have to ask the SNP to explain how it would go about funding the widening access project. I think that the whole of Scotland and many people who are in colleges and universities want to know the answer to that. Perhaps, in summing up, we could get some answer to that. I also think that, when it comes to punching above their weight, our universities and colleges, as the minister has rightly said, are second to none. They are not going to be able to continue to do that at the same time as making sure that they are globally competitive and widen access and be at the cutting edge of research and development unless there is some more money in the sector. That is, I think, agreed. The question is the controversy is, how is that going to be funded? That is a major issue for Scotland, never mind for the institutions themselves. Of course, universities rightly claim themselves that a great deal of their success lies in that diversity that they have, that the one shape, the one size form of delivery is never appropriate when it comes to higher or further education. I think that if we can just dwell on colleges for a minute, one of the great successes of colleges in this country is the fact that they have been able to respond to the delivery of their local economy. They have been in the position of being able to provide employment and jobs when it comes to that local economy. I hear what the Government says about the intention to provide full-time places. I understand that, but, for goodness sake, can we have a situation in which we do not take away so many part-time places, because those part-time places are the very ones that allow the colleges to be flexible in the way that they respond to that local economy? Of course, they bring in so many different types of students who, in days previous, would have been quite far remote from the employment situation. I think that there is a big issue there in what colleges are wanting to achieve. They are excellent institutions, but they feel at the moment that some of that is being diminished. When it comes to the regional structures that colleges have just now, they want to know a little bit more about how the spend will be in that regional structure so that they can take advantage of the local economies that reflect their own individual situations. I think that that is something that is very important. When we look at the future for our colleges and universities, we are looking at a country that I believe is full of talent, full of ambition, full of top quality staff and students, but we will not be able to maintain some of that unless the Scottish Government can address some of the big issues about the funding, about the structures and the funding council structures and whether those outcome agreements are going to be based on what they are just now or whether we need to make changes to the funding council. That is notwithstanding some of the issues that we had when we looked at the funding council when Audit Scotland presented a rather difficult picture of it when it came to the Glasgow College or the Koch Bridge College situation. Is that funding council triangle, is that important and is it something that will continue to deliver the quality that we want to see in the years ahead? I think that there are questions about the funding council and whether it is best serving both our colleges and our universities. May I conclude my remarks on the fact that I am probably one of the biggest supporters of our FE and HE sectors? As I said, I had the privilege of working very closely with them because of my cross-party group situation. That is something that I treasure very much because they are very well informed and they provide it in what I think is a fairly non-party political basis. They are objective in their analysis and I think that objectivity in that analysis is so crucial. That is why I am asking the Scottish Government if they can give us some answers today about how they are going to fund HE and FE. I now call Ian Gray to speak to and move amendment 43.1.2. You have seven minutes please, Mr Gray. Thank you Presiding Officer. I too welcome the minister to her place and I want to start by agreeing wholeheartedly with her about the importance of colleges and universities to Scotland's past, present and future. That is not new of course, particularly when it comes to universities that have played a central role in who we are, where we are going and how we are seen for hundreds of years. Indeed, when Voltaire said that we looked to Scotland for all our ideas of civilisation, the enlightenment that he so admired was centred on our great universities and their academic stars. Now those same institutions and many new universities make an enormous contribution to present-day Scotland and not just through ideas or the teaching of almost a quarter of a million students, but, as the minister pointed out, in economic impact and, indeed, in attracting research funding of over £750 million every year. As for the future, that research and the new companies that spring from it, along with the highest-quality graduates produced in our universities, are the basis of our potential prosperity. For in this globalised world there is no future for a country like ours in low-skilled, low-quality work and enterprise. It lies rather in high-skilled jobs and leading edge innovation in technologies perhaps only just being thought of now. Just as important to that future are our colleges, which, after all, not only deliver 20 per cent of higher education courses but also create other pathways through apprenticeship training and vocational courses, pathways to those high-skilled, high-value jobs on which our prosperity will depend. They also, like universities, create billions of pounds in economic value every year and they increasingly drive innovation too, particularly in the SME sector. Tertiary education is a sector to be cherished, protected, developed and invested in. The picture is not exactly as the minister glossed it. For education budgets, it has been cut by 10 per cent over recent years. Colleges have been the hardest hit with 152,000 fewer students and some 3,500 fewer staff. Forced mergers have not reduced the savings, we were told they would. Re-classification as public bodies has curtailed colleges' ability to manage their budgets over the long term. Universities have not escaped this Government's austerity either. Higher education funding fell by 7 per cent between 2008 and 2014 and last year university budgets were cut by 3.3 per cent and their baselines for next year were cut by even more than that. One result has been pressure on staff. As we speak, University of Edinburgh staff are on strike and Glasgow university will follow on Thursday. This dispute over low pay, the gender pay gap and continued use by universities of casual and zero-hour contracts for staff is at least in part a reflection of staff being asked to pay the price for budget cuts. College lecturers, too, had to resort to strike action earlier this year. Many of those lecturers have been redeployed to new colleges, new campuses and even new towns. They have all seen colleagues lost to the sector and the one positive promise that they were made was that they would move towards equal pay for equal work, whether it was carried out in Aberdeen or Galashield. That was a promise made by Scottish ministers, but they have tried to walk away from it. Colleges Scotland estimate that delivering equal pay would cost £30 million to £60 million per year, yet their budgets have been cut in real terms yet again. The truth is that if we are serious about the importance of FE and HE, we cannot escape using the powers of this Parliament to stop the cuts and protect education budgets. That is how we do it and show confidence and trust in the tertiary sector in a way that is real and not simply warm words. Not just for the sake of staff, but for students, too. The Sutton Trust tells us that a young person from a rich family in Scotland is over four times more likely to go to university than one from the most deprived. Last week's UCAS figures showed a 7 per cent drop last year in school leavers accepted into university from the poorest families. We know, too— Shirley-Anne Somerville Thank you for allowing me to intervene. Can you also recognise that, as he pointed out, the colleges play an important role in delivering higher education and that was not included in the Sutton Trust report. While we can learn from what the Sutton Trust has to say, the figure that you have given is not quite comparable. Of course, what seems to escape the minister is that her own government's widening access target is a target for access to university. That is what the widening access commission was charged with looking at. However, let me say something in a moment about colleges and articulation into universities. We know, too, that those from poorer families who get into university are more likely to drop out. If they take up a student loan, they will end up more indebted than students who start off from a better off background. If poorer students enter a degree course through college, as many do, we also know that over 50 per cent of them will end up having to repeat a year. Some universities such as UWS have a good track record on that, but if a student articulates to an ancient university, they will almost certainly have to do an extra year in education. For those in FE rather than HE, students find that they have no entitlement to support, that it will vary from college to college, and they cannot be sure that it will continue because the Scottish Government routinely under funds the student maintenance budget for colleagues and then tops it up later in the year. It is some time since the president of the NUS told this Parliament that student support in FE is not fit for purpose and yet nothing has changed. That is why we do not simply need an access commissioner and a review of student finance. We need urgency, a commitment to at least restore cuts to grants now, help for current students, not just future students, to see their studies through. We need to stop the abolition in this year's budget of the very extra places for widening access that we talk so often about in this chamber. We must wind up. What we need to see are properly funded, properly integrated colleges and universities, working together, students supported to study access on ability and potential. You must wind up, please, Mr Bray. Our amendment simply asks that we get these fundamentals right and quickly I move. We now move to open speeches of up to five minutes and brevity would be appreciated. I call Jenny Goruth to be followed by Jamie Greene. As most of you now know, I am a proud pfeifer. I went to school in St Andrews, the home of the oldest university in Scotland. St Andrews is the third oldest university in the world, and it was founded in 1413 when the Pope issued six papal bulls formally constituting the university. Growing up in that town, I know how important a role universities can and are playing in Scotland's success. St Andrews University contributes over £484 million per year to the Scottish economy. It supports nearly 9,000 full-time jobs, including my mum, and with students and staff from over 120 countries, it is the most international small community in Scotland and, indeed, the UK. Nationally, universities provide a strong export role worth £1.5 billion to the Scottish economy. 91 per cent of Scottish graduates find work or further study within the first six months of completing their studies, and since 2013-14, Scotland's universities have provided over 6,000 students with courses as part of the Government's commitment to widening access. In Scotland's colleges, the picture is similarly positive. The college sector delivers £14.9 million to the Scottish economy every year and employs more than 10,000 full-time staff. The Government is committed to an education system that creates a level playing field. That is the salient point of today's debate—that we have a higher and further education system that is based on a student's ability to learn and not on their ability to pay. Liz Smith is rightly very praiseworthy of St Andrews University. At St Andrews, a high number of students who come from the rest of the UK and from the international community do have to pay. Jenny Gilruth I recognise the member's points, but I will come to that later in the debate. I think that this Government has really based our legacy—well, the SNP's legacy—on education for Scottish students that is free at the point of use. Looking to the Tory benches, I have to say that we do not agree with their plans in terms of charging for tuition £6,000 a year. For us, that goes against the grain of free education. We believe that you should be able to learn irrelevant of your income. However, it was not always like that. When I left school in 2002, I went to study at Glasgow University. At the time, Labour and the Liberals controlled those benches. At university, I qualified for a full student loan and a bursary. On graduation, however, I was met with a bill for over £2,000. How can it be the case that the daughter of a single-parent family can qualify for a bursary and a full student loan and yet still be expected to put the bill for her tuition? The graduate endowment was a backdoor tuition fee. Make no mistake about it. It was not means tested. It applied to everyone regardless of income. Although it might have been forgotten by my younger sister's generations, we should never forget the financial burden that the previous administration attached simply to learning in Scotland. The SNP is committed to helping more low-income families to stay in full-time education by maintaining the educational maintenance allowance, for example. Today, Scotland provides the highest college bursary and the best support for university students in the UK. The Scottish Government is now reviewing the provision of student support so that funding follows individual students as opposed to where they study. I know that the SNP is not alone in advocating the key role that education plays in providing a route out of poverty. It provides students with the necessary currency to trade in the employment marketplace and, fundamentally, we believe that every child, irrespective of their background, should have an equal opportunity of pursuing higher or further education. When I was at Glasgow University, I worked for the goals programme or greater opportunity of access to learning. Goals focus on widening access by targeting schools with the lowest progression rates into higher education in the west of Scotland. It focused on 46 second rates and more than 250 associated primaries. As a group of students, we visited schools and tried to demystify higher education, often through informal discussion. I do remember confiscating a pen from an unsuspect in pupil during one such chat, however, so perhaps I was always destined to become a teacher. Nonetheless, the point of goals was to raise ambition and aspiration, to reach out to pupils who would never consider going to university before, to normalise higher and further education outside the classroom. The First Minister has been clear about the need to widen access to learning. The Scottish Government will guarantee... Liam Kerr, very quickly please. Of course, the proposer of the motion and the current speaker say lots about widening access but have not actually talked about reinstating and reversing the cuts in order to allow the universities to deliver those facilities. You must answer and wind up, please, Ms Kerr. That is from the Tory benches. You really couldn't make it up. As the constituency MSP for Mid Fife and Glenethys, I am absolutely delighted about the partnership working between Fife College, the Scottish Government and Fife Council in the creation of the new Levenmouth campus. £25 million of Scottish Government funding is supporting this capital investment. There is work yet to be done in widening access, particularly in our ancient universities. Today's motion, however, is about celebrating the vital contribution of Scotland's higher and further education institutions in moving Scotland forward. I left school at 16, which might surprise some people, as I was a studious and capable young man who did well at school, but I really struggled perhaps with the culture for lots of the reasons that I explained in my maiden speech. Instead, I went off to James Watt College in Greenock to study for my hires rather than stay in secondary. It was a bold but controversial choice, in fact, my teachers were quite horrified. I received a lovely email the other day from one Mrs Mary Henry, or Madame Henri, as we used to call her, my French teacher. She was absolutely thrilled that I had been elected to Parliament, and it was moving to hear from her. We all have a story to tell about a special teacher who has helped you along in life that spotted a spark and nurtured it. I had many such role models, and if I may be so indulgent, I would like to thank them. However, they were certain that I would be distracted by being in college instead of at school, and the reality was quite true. There was a student union, an altogether political place for debate. There were adults in my class, retired folk, business people, unemployed people, curious pensioners, failed school leavers trying again to get the grades that they needed for university and even hobbyist learners. They were treated as an adult, not as a child. Why do I mention this? It is largely due to the fact that I fear that funding for student support in Scotland is struggling to keep up with demand. Let's have a think about the effect that that might have if you're contemplating going to college in Scotland. In terms of budget spend in an academic year, by December 2015, 67 per cent of colleges had already committed to 100 per cent of their bursary spend. You could argue that the funding system is not based on demand, but on the availability of cash. The majority of colleges in Scotland have to top up their bursary schemes with additional funds because they do not have enough money to meet student demand. The in-year redistribution is an attempt by the Scottish Funding Council to ensure that money is being allocated in FE where it is needed. Their own figures show that only 43 per cent of colleges had their requests met, leaving a shortfall of £2.4 million. Year after year, the same story unfolds. The SFC is unable to meet demand from colleges and the requests are unmet. That means that many students in disadvantaged situations are unable to pursue their aspirations. Even colleges in Scotland themselves have said that that has led to a system that has caused inequalities. Over half of all FE students questioned that they have no idea how much money is coming to them before they start their course. As a result, 70 per cent of them said that not knowing how much support they would have makes it more difficult to make a decision whether they will even go to college or not. Where would we like to see things go? On the matter of higher education, graduate contribution, it is important that we have a proper debate on that. I moved on from college and went to university in 1997 on a no-fee basis. Yet I dropped out one year later. Why? Quite simply, I couldn't afford to go to uni. Even if I had been accumulating fees, which I would later pay back once I started earning a decent wage, I would still have found it difficult to stay on. There was no other support available. The cost of living was prohibitive. Housing, travel, food, books and bills. So I am not ideologically in favour of a graduate contribution scheme because of some political whim. I am driven by the idea that the money raised would and should be used to help poor students, as I was, be given the support that they need to go to college and university. The latest figures from the SFC show that withdrawal rates for further education are at 25 per cent. In summary, further education students continue to exist in a system in which funding decisions have been a lot more volatile than for the HEC students. College learners are often those who are having a second chance at education or who prefer a vocational path in life. They are often the ones who will need the support the most, which is why it is critical that the Government listens to the needs of the sector and makes sensible decisions to support those poorer students. We simply must do better. Presiding Officer, can I take this opportunity to congratulate Shirley-Anne Somerville on her post as well? We have known each other for a very long time and it is probably best just to leave it at that, because it will probably integrate our years and that is not obviously polite. However, it is interesting to listen to this debate. The Tories have constantly tried to move away from the rhetoric of the election campaign and are trying to sound as if they are almost reasonable. It is quite strange that, when you hear them discussing things like how they would deal with poorer students, how they would allow poorer students to go to university by charging them more money, that seems to me a bizarre way to think that that is going to increase anyone else. However, it is only correct that we finally get into a debate in the nitty-gritty of this parliamentary session and talk about the great success that is the higher and further education sector. It is very successful. The First Minister and today the minister has said that education will be one of the most important aspects of the Scottish Government's work for this term. Building on the successes of the previous terms and years and working towards bridging the educational attainment gap and providing access for all to university or providing the training necessary for young people in Scotland to be successful in their desired industry, I applaud the Scottish Government's focus that young people should have access to a rich variety of high-quality learning and training opportunities that prepares them for life and for work. Who in that chamber would not agree with that goal? Who would not want to work with the Scottish Government on that project? However, our colleges and universities are very successful and they are a major part of our economy. A College of Scotland report found that our colleges deliver £14.9 billion for the Scottish economy each year. Our universities employ 38,000 people directly and support 140,000 jobs in the Scottish economy indirectly. Those numbers alone explain how vital they are to our economy, but it is their success as places of learning that they excel. From a very practical point, I would like to explain that 91 per cent of graduates from Scottish universities were in work or further study within six months of graduation. Compare that with the UK average of 88 per cent and 85 per cent of new graduates were judged to be well prepared for work in the latest employer skills survey. That shows that, not only is our universities the sector preparing young men and women for life, they are ensuring that they are equipped for work as well. Our world-class research sector provides a vital foundation to innovation in our economy. The research excellent framework in 2014 results found that Scotland's higher education institutions undertake research as world-leading quality. The impact of research on Scotland's higher education institution is performing higher than that in the rest of the UK. However, part of the success, part of everything that has been happening, has been framed in the fact that the sector itself is working extremely hard, but that this Government has been supportive of higher education and further education. In 2008, when undergilded graduates had been free, the policy has protected 120,000 undergraduates studying in Scotland and is saving them an additional date of £27,000. Liam Kerr? Does the member agree that the undoubted success of these institutions will be difficult to maintain when the funding cuts that the Government found so amusing will lead to the job losses of our excellent staff? I know that the members knew, but when you have already had a slap in the face earlier on from my colleague, Jenny Gilruth, that the Tories have a cheek coming here and talking about any form of cuts when it is them that are cutting the budget of this Scottish Government. When we look at widening access, which has been a major part of this debate, I would like to say that there is a place, and it has already been mentioned by our friend and colleague Iain Gray, that the University of the West of Scotland, based in Paisley, has actually been delivering 20 per cent of pupils from lower-wage backgrounds. They have been doing it, and they are wildly recognised throughout the whole of Scotland that they have been able to do that. That is because around 18 per cent of those students in the Paisley campus are from 20 per cent, but overall three campuses are the same. I would say that the only other institution that students in Glasgow Calais, which is close to the rest of them, are not close. We need to look at those places, what they are doing and find out how we can make that difference and ensure that we can get that access. At the same time, I hope that the Tories will come in at the real world and bring us a bit of a debate with a bit of sense in it. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I start off by congratulating Shirley-Anne Somerville on her appointment and welcoming her to her post. I think that that is a very important debate this afternoon to focus on the role of colleges and universities. As a number of speakers have said, they fulfil a number of key roles. They are places of opportunity for young students and mature students alike in order to enhance their skills base, to learn more and then to go on to contribute not only to their own self-advancement but to contribute to Scotland's economic growth. They also serve as centres of research. Ian Gray covered a lot of that in his speech, which ensures that we can have areas of expertise that link well with industry. The key point about colleges and universities is that we need to see them as the drivers for economic growth. We have had the recent GTP revision where the forecasts have been revised down the way. That will be a concern to everybody in the chamber because we all want to see a growing Scottish economy that provides jobs and a good standard of living for people in all our constituencies and regions. It is important that we get the set-up right in colleges and universities in order to contribute to that. It is important that colleges and universities have a strong link to business in terms of the courses that they provide. One of the things that employers tell me is that sometimes students who leave college or university do not have the skill set that is required in order to be able to fit right into the workplace and make a good contribution. There are good examples throughout the country where colleges are working closely with business. If I can complement the city of Glasgow College and the region that I represent, I have set up an industry academy. That is good because it is employer-led and it is focused on building the industry into the curriculum. It has had some success. It is in its second year. There are 3,677 students on work experience and 1,932 on work placement. That will go a long way to addressing the shortfalls that exist in terms of skills. In terms of important areas, the importance of engineering and information technology cannot be understressed. Earlier in the year, the Institute of Engineering and Technology held an event in the Parliament. As part of their survey, it focused on the fact that 59 per cent of businesses were concerned that the shortage of engineers could undermine business and business growth. That continues to be an issue, as it does with information technology. One report last year said that potentially there are a job shortage of 11,000 in the information technology sector. That is true, particularly in the case of computer coders—something that I used to do in our previous life. That stresses the importance of building those subjects in and supporting those subjects through school, college and university levels. We all agree that we want to see widened access to college and university. Therefore, it is a matter of concern, as a certain report highlighted recently, that gaps in university participation between the most and the least disadvantaged areas are higher than Scotland and elsewhere in the UK. When we cut bursary support from 100 million to 64 million, that has an impact. The point in the Labour motion about reversing cuts to HE grants and bursaries to students from poorer backgrounds is that it is not an unreasonable demand in order to address the concerns about widening access. In summary, colleges and universities play an important role, but it is important that we get the set-up correct, that they link to business, that they contribute to economic growth and that they prioritise areas where we have skills shortfall and that we also increase widening access in order to burden the sector and ensure that it continues to flourish. I call Gillian Martin to be followed by Alexander Stewart. Too often, political discourse around education relies on numbers. The success of people can never simply be measured in figures, and I am very aware of a tendency to judge the success of young people and the success of this Government purely in terms of how many go to university, so I want to talk about colleges and partnerships. Colleges are providing higher national qualifications, and those fall into the category of higher education, as the ministers mentioned. It is not just reserved to universities and we should always be mindful of that, particularly when we talk about figures. Colleges provide a pathway to university degree courses, and often that pathway can allow a person to get a better idea of the degree course that is most suitable, meaning that they do not drop out of university so easily. Or not, because leaving college with a higher national qualification and going straight into employment is also a measure of success. When it comes to education, one size most definitely does not fit all. Over the past 10 years, I have seen FE change to reflect that. In particular, the new focus on courses that lead to recognised qualifications and employment and the success of the two-plus-two programmes between colleges and universities. The relationship between my former employer, North East Scotland College—which I will call Nescol from now on, because it is quicker—and Robert Gordon University, or RGU, is a terrific exemplar of that. Working together, Nescol and RGU have created a North East articulation hub, which is a model for the rest of Scotland. Not only does the programme facilitate progression, it also ensures that the college and the university make a really major contribution to widening access. The partnership also works with schools in areas that have been traditionally less likely to access education beyond school. Funded by the Scottish Funding Council, RGU has developed a suite of programmes designed to support S5 and S6 pupils who are considering studying at a degree level, either via a college route or by direct entry to the university. The access to programme offers the pupils an opportunity to get first-hand experience of undergraduate degree study courses and student life on campus via twilight sessions held after school. However, I also want to tackle the rhetoric that I have been subjected to by my political opponents over part-time courses and cuts to college places, and that Liz Smith alluded to as well as Ian Gray. As someone who is taught across both the Labour and Lib Dem Administration and the SNP Administration, I was somewhat of a bankers ghost when Lib Dem and Labour opponents thought they could trot out the college places cut line at debates because I was lecturing across both political administrations. There are two myths around this subject. The first is that full-time college places are full-time hours. No, they are 16 hours per week, class contact time and those hours are usually timetabled to over two to three days to allow students to hold down additional employment or to manage family responsibilities, and that is the experience in the college that I taught in. Myth number two is that people are disadvantaged as they now do not have opportunities due to the lack of part-time courses. Returning and mature students can still access courses that can fit in with their own circumstances and full-time courses, but part-time courses are still available in colleges. It is just that they do not equate to the sheer number under the agenda promoted by the previous administration, which was well meaning, no doubt, but had some unfortunate manifestations. Leisure courses accounted for a great deal of the stats quoted in political rhetoric around part-time courses, and it is enjoyable as teaching a one-off afternoon course on using your camera to people of retirement age. That type of part-time course rarely encouraged anyone to come back and access courses with recognised qualifications attached. They did not tend to lead to employment and competed with other institutions that offer leisure courses such as community centres, libraries and third sector organisations, of which I will give you an example of, but I will give way. Very quickly, please, Jamie Greene. Thank you very much. Cutting courses such as IT courses from £4,000 to £21,000 does the member accept that that will contribute to real skills, short in Scotland? That is not just photography courses that we are talking about. Well, it is not my experience that those courses are being cut. I am talking about leisure courses, the bulk of which actually took that £125,000, and that is what I am talking about here. Anyway, an example of one of the third sector organisations that is also delivering part-time courses. On Saturday, I went to the Bellmints Cinema to watch the British Film Institute film course screenings taught by station house media unit, who are working in partnership with the college to provide equipment and teaching rooms. In the previous funding model, SHMU, that station house media unit, and Nescol will be competitors, but now their partners and 12, 16 to 18-year-olds have a great experience, many from region areas who now have the confidence and are rooting to FE and beyond. When we reduced the educational debate down to targets and numbers, we simply missed the substance of what we are trying to achieve, and that is improving the life chances of our population and providing skilled people to grow our economy. Partnership across the institutions is the way forward, and just looking at the numbers simply does not take that into account. Alexander Stewart, to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I congratulate the cabinet secretary and his team on their appointment? Following my short contribution to the debate on the treaty of Perth, I would now like to take this opportunity in my first full debate to give a little bit more background about my election to this chamber and to the beautiful part of Mid Scotland Fife that I now represent. I have had a varied career working in many sectors, and I have run my own businesses. I hope to bring my knowledge and experience to this when I am participating in this chamber over the next few years. Over the last 17 years, I have had the honour and privilege of serving Perth and Cynus Council as a councillor and have a proven track record of working for hard-working families. For a long time, my family has been involved in politics and business, and many of them have actively supported parties across the chamber. My great-grandfather, Bailey Stewart, would have been sitting with the Labour benches in his time. My mother's mother would have been sitting with the Liberals if there were any here to give them a gender balance within their own group. Moreover, my father was a major donor to the Scottish Nationalist Party in the past, and was the agent for Douglas Crawford when he was the member of Parliament for Perth and East Perthshire, so I come from a chequered history of individuals involved in politics over the generations. However, there is no doubt that, from my earliest recollections, I was always a Conservative. I believe in the values of traditional institutions, the rule of law, the idea that people should be allowed to make their own choices in life and that local democracy should be part of our being, and those are being greatly eroded by the current SNP administration. Moreover, I am someone who fundamentally believes in the union and Scotland's place within it. Conservative representation in Midscotland in Fife doubled in May, and I am delighted to be joining my long-standing colleague Liz Smith and Murdo Fraser in this chamber. They have represented the Scottish political scene and debate very well over the years that they have been here. That increased representation is as a result of the direct influence of many people within my region and other parts of Scotland who wanted a strong opposition, who wanted people in this chamber to hold the SNP to account, and we will certainly do that. Today, it gives me the opportunity to be involved and to give my views on the education system within Scotland. It was Benjamin Disraeli who once said, upon the education of the people of this country, the fate of this country depends, and I firmly believe that that is very true today. Today, I want to focus on Scotland's future and its further education in particular. Our colleges play a crucial role within our economy, within the sector, and we have heard today that they contribute £15 billion a year. Recently, moreover, the vital services that they have provided have been undermined by the SNP's reforms and its savage cuts of the sector. The SNP has cut 152,000 places over the last few years in order to fund their populist yet ineffective policies. As I have said in my maiden speech, I am afraid not. Free university tuition has, for example, not only led to fewer students from poorer backgrounds going into higher education, but it has also failed to recognise that university education is not the right path for every individual. For too long, our education and vocational qualifications have been seen by some as second best. The actions of the Government have only served to reinforce that information. As a Conservative, I fundamentally believe in the principles of localism—decisions that are best taken by communities and organisations that directly affect themselves and not central government. The national rhetoric is about bringing power closer to the people, but their actions in government have done quite the reverse.  Thank you so much. In mid-Scotland and Fife, Perth UHI and Forth Valley have led the way with their economy flexibility. I pay tribute to what they have achieved, but there is no doubt, Deputy Presiding Officer, that there is an opportunity within this chamber for us to stand up for education. Following the recent election results, it is apparent that the SNP will have to take part and listen. In the new and more political diverse Parliament, I greatly look forward to playing my part. I will not put the microphone again and tap it again. Didn't expect to sound like drumbeat. I call Daniel Johnson. We are followed by Colin Beattie, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to add my welcome to the minister to her new role. I am also very pleased to be speaking in the debate today. Undoubtedly, universities are important to Scotland's future. They have certainly played a unique and distinctive role in Scotland's identity and culture. Scotland has a place of long-standing value on literacy, and the number of universities has meant that we have a legacy of learning in this country, which makes us unique within the nations of the United Kingdom, and globally. However, the debate is about the future, rather than the past. There is one contribution that I would like to make today. We have heard a number of speakers talk about the contribution to date with universities, but it is vital that we talk about the future. At a recent meeting, I note that Jamie Hepburn is no longer in his chair, and Jamie Hepburn accused me of being a little paranoid about a takeover by Skynet because of my talk about the importance of looking at technological change in our economy. I think that those changes are going to be profound, and I think that the role of tertiary education is vital. If our future economy is going to be knowledge-based, it is therefore clear that universities will play a pivotal role. They already have a direct impact and influence on our economy. Edinburgh University, of which I have a particular focus given my constituency, makes a £2 billion contribution to the Scottish economy. That means that for every pound that it receives from the Scottish Funding Council, it generates an almost further £10. However, universities are also becoming an important role in terms of economic generation and as a bed for creating start-ups. For example, Fanjol is a company that many people might have heard of, but, like me, we are a little bit worried that they did not quite understand what it did. The reason is that they are a company that creates fantasy online games but is almost completely focused on the US market. Starting from a desk in the King's buildings in my constituencies, we now have a global company. Hundreds of others are high-growth start-ups coming from the university and supporting thousands of jobs in Edinburgh. Spin-outs are also another huge success story. Almost a quarter of UK academic-based spin-outs have emerged from Scottish institutions. An example is Celtic renewables, which were spun out from Napier, which, from whisky by-products, creates renewable energy sources. However, it is clear that, if universities are going to embrace this role in terms of generating the future of the economy, the emphasis of places and support is vital. We cannot hamper this role. In a recent survey, the NUS found that a majority of students had anxieties about their finances that impacted on their studies. Likewise, UKAS's stats show that a lower proportion of Scotland's 18-year-olds are going to university than the rest of the UK. In Scotland, the poorest are four times less likely to go to university than the wealthier counterparts, whereas that is only two and a half times less likely in England. We can maybe quibble about the numbers, but the fact is that, when we see this disparity of access, we are squandering talent. That is tragic not just for their interests but also for the wider economy, because we are losing that talent. If universities play the role of creating the industries and jobs of the future, the role of the colleges is undoubtedly about making sure that our people are skilled in order to fill those jobs. While we have talked a lot about FE providing HE courses, I think that the real emphasis in terms of that future economy is about skilling, but most importantly, reskilling our workforce. I come from the retail industry, and that is where Skynet comes in. Every day, we see deliveries coming to your shop with a man, and unfortunately, it typically is a man, driving a van and taking the boxes out the back of the van. In 10, 15 or 20 years' time, there may well be the van, but it will drive itself, and the boxes might even carry themselves into the shops. That might seem like an anecdote, but one in 10 workers work in the transport and distribution sector, so the need to reskill those people is vital. The historic role of colleges in providing those skills points to the future role that they can play. At the moment, 67 per cent of colleges have allocated their entire bursary budget by December of last year, and 45 per cent are topping up bursary from discretionary funds. If we want colleges to play that role, we need to make sure that they are resourced properly. While Gillian Martin pointed to the numbers of 150,000, maybe not being quite correct, those 150,000 places have gone, and while she might accuse those places of being leisure courses, those are precisely the sorts of courses that allow people to skill and reskill for the future economy. Economic changes are coming. Getting it right for university and colleges is key to protecting jobs. We cannot stop those changes, but we can equip ourselves to make sure that we can embrace the future rather than ensuring it. Over the past decades, it has become very evident that education is one of the primary routes for young people to reach their life goals and fulfil their aspirations. Colleges and universities have an essential and irreplaceable role in that. They can help to ensure that, whatever your background, you will have the same life opportunities as anyone else. Therefore, it is more important than ever that we acknowledge and understand the work that colleges and universities do and support them as they should be. Looking at the statistical changes in further and higher education over the past decade, we can see how the sector has responded to the Government's call for more focused support for school leavers. Of the 97,040 students who qualified from higher education in 2014-15, 55,909 people from the 16 to 24 age group compared us with the 40,160 students in the same age group from the 81,165 students who qualified in 2006, an increase of about 7 per cent. We must not forget that the key factor is how many students actually complete their studies. From the Scottish Funding Council's own statistics, we know that the overall increase in the number of qualifiers over the past 10 years stands at 19.6 per cent, or to put a number into it, at 15,875. The importance of multiculturalism to our educational system and, by extension, Scotland's global reach cannot be underestimated. University of Scotland's report, which was published in 2013, outlined the benefits of international students as being the enrichment of learning experience, the development of an international outlook among the home students and graduates, positive impacts on the wider community and the creation of a vast network of alumni around the world that maintains strong and enduring connections to Scotland. While having alumni across the globe helps to raise Scotland's profile, attracting foreign students to Scotland is key in providing home-based students with a global outlook. Nearly 80 per cent of business leaders were reported as saying that knowledge and awareness of the wider world were important to them while recruiting, with 85 per cent confirming that they value employees who can work with stakeholders from a range of cultures and companies. In my constituency of Midlothian North and Musselborough, I am privileged to have both Queen Margaret University in Musselborough and the Dalkeith campus of Edinburgh College. Queen Margaret University has taken a number of innovative steps to support a range of Scottish sectors. To reflect the strength of Scotland's food and drink sector, four years ago, the university took the step of launching the Scottish Centre for Food Development and Innovation. Through its work with various enterprise agencies, it is developing innovative and healthy products. The centre has engaged around 250 businesses and delivered over 70 projects since 2011. Given that health is the main reason for taking a particular food choice in one out of four meal occasions, which accounts for £11.4 billion to the UK food industry, those initiatives should be applauded, especially given the university's receipt of two interface awards for innovation, sustained partnership and the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce award. QMU has also taken steps to help nurture business startups through the rebranding of its business innovation zone to support graduate startups in the creative industries. The zone includes business incubation units alongside non-campus business gateway, giving startups the opportunity to have premises and advice all close to hand. The gateway is the first of its kind to be situated within a university. In the launch of the student tourism ambassador role Scotland, otherwise known as STARS, the university took steps to enhance our tourist industry, a partnership between the university and the airport. The STARS scheme says that QMU students acting as paid official international tourism ambassadors at Edinburgh airport. The scheme has gained such a success that it has got the endorsement from marketing Edinburgh and will be expanded this year. In the longer term, the university is continuing development of the Edinburgh innovation park, and the park is expected to form part of a network of innovation hubs throughout the greater Edinburgh region. The East Lothian area alone will see an additional and very welcome 13,000 jobs. The full extent of the development will be over the next 15 to 20 years, but the dividends will clearly be exceptional. Edinburgh College plays its own very strong role in contributing to Scotland society. As of May this year, it was the single biggest provider of students to Edinburgh universities, and 92 per cent of graduates were recorded as being an employment of further studies within six months of graduating. Given that there are around 20,000 students at the college, that is a highly impressive statistics. There is no doubt that colleges and universities play substantial and invaluable roles in their contribution to Scotland's success, and I am glad to have the opportunity to highlight some of the steps, the establishments in my constituency have taken, and I look forward to working with them over the coming years. Mr Beattie, I call Ross Greed. We follow by Rachel Hamilton. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Like others, I would like to start by passing on my own and my party's congratulations to the minister upon taking her post. It goes without question that our colleges and universities contribute immensely to the Scottish economy and to our society. No one in this chamber should dispute the opportunities that they provide to individuals, to communities and to the countries of whole. We can and have all acknowledged that. The question in this term of Parliament, however, is whether we are actually willing to give the support that is needed to the institutions, to students and to staff. The Greens believe that an entitlement-based support system for students in further education would be an ideal place to start. There is currently immense uncertainty for FE students regarding the funding that is available to them. More than half of FE students in 2015 were not sure how much financial support was available, and most of those students reported that that uncertainty made their decision to undertake their course more difficult. That uncertainty comes from a funding support system based on fixed sums of money, rather than on the needs of students in further education. A freedom of information request in the national union of students found that two thirds of colleges had already committed 100 per cent or more of their FE bursary budget by halfway through the year. That situation results in the vast majority of colleges using core teaching funds to make up shortfalls. Many are forced to use their discretionary budget to make up for the shortfall in the bursary budget. The discretionary budget exists to support students who have an immediate financial need. Although it is entirely understandable that colleges have felt the need to do this, a system that makes transferring money between equally vital funds necessary is not what FE students need. When almost a third of colleges have had to stop applications or limit the amounts awarded from their hardship fund, because that budget has been diverted, there is a clear need to move to an entitlement-based system once centred on the needs of students. If nothing else, we should treat our further education students as the equals of higher education students, and we should certainly not offer disparity to support based on whether a student has come through the doors of a college or of a university. When every pound invested in our colleges results in a net gain of almost six pound return to the taxpayer, we cannot continue with a system that creates such uncertainty that many people are put off applying in the first place—a system that can hold people back from gaining the skills and qualifications that they need, not just to prosper as an individual, but to contribute further towards improving Scotland's economy. There are challenges to such a system, not least the risk that students making use of it would see their access to social security reduced. Any move to an entitlement-based system should protect students from such a reduction, and we would be keen for the Scottish Government to investigate the options available there. One area that is key to supporting all students, but in particular those who face existing barriers to education, is the provision of support over the summer months. We are all aware of the serious issue of students dropping out of their courses over the summer, primarily due to financial pressures, an issue that affects those taking exam resets in particular. That is why the Scottish Greens have called for a national hardship fund that can support students between academic years and rebalance their bursary or extend their loan payments to cover the summer. Given that most students last year felt that they had little control over their own finances and have seriously considered leaving their course, the need for such efforts as a national hardship fund is clear. Not only will that reduce the number of students dropping out of their courses, it will tackle the serious problem of commercial loans, which are contributing considerably towards the unsustainable levels of debt that too many students are leaving education with. Although we welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to reviewing student support, that is of course not the whole story. Staff at our colleges and universities have faced real pressure in recent years. I highlight the work of the two major unions in the sector, the UCU and the EIS Further Education Lecturers Association, in all they do to represent their members. Those unions have continued to do so in the face of unequal pay, real-terms pay cuts, senior management who are indifferent or worse, and they have won notable victories in doing so. As Ian Gray says, those disputes continue with Edinburgh University staff on strike today. Higher education staff have faced a real-terms pay cut of 15 per cent in the last seven years, and if we are serious about the benefits that our universities bring, as all members of all parties seem to be, can we really see that as an acceptable situation? In a week, we are getting other university principals hit the headlines for receiving a salary equal to our own in this chamber for his second job on top of a frankly obscene existing salary from his institution. It is no surprise that staff morale is suffering. Deputy Presiding Officer, like the minister, I and my party are committed to keeping Scotland's university's tuition free for our students, and like the minister, I was the first member of my family to go to university. In an ironic twist of fate, I did not complete that course due to a job offer that I could not refuse, one made by the minister herself and for which I am still grateful. However, this debate must go further than tuition fees, and the Greens welcome the Government's commitment to the findings of the commission on widening access. We will push them to be bolder, we will challenge them where necessary, but we will work to make sure that our students and staff at universities and colleges receive the support that they deserve. It is their priorities and their voices which must be at the heart of this debate. In my maiden speech, I highlighted the importance that colleges have in the delivery of Scottish tourism. As the motion states, Scotland's young people should have access to a rich variety of high-quality learning and training opportunities that prepare them for life and work. It is with that in mind that we recognise the benefit that colleges have to our local communities. For example, skills gained at border colleges are more likely to be used by employers in the borders. In the south of Scotland, jobs are typically in low-paid sectors, including agriculture, forestry and fishing and accommodation and food services linked to tourism. I disagree with Gillian Martin that college courses play a crucial role in the development of key skills needed in those sectors. Our colleges serve some of the most rural communities and play a significant role in fair access. Courses such as catering and hospitality, gamekeeping and wildlife management are popular career choices for school leavers. Delivering accessible courses on the doorstep means that talent is homegrown, allowing local businesses to take advantage of those skills. That formula will create increased productivity and growth. There is cross-party—yes? She recognised that the whole point of the way that colleges are delivering part-time education is entirely to ensure that they are based on the needs of local businesses and the local economy, and those short-term courses are still being funded. I would like to draw your attention to my area where businesses are very reliant on those types of jobs, particularly in hospitality and the service sector. It is entirely important that we keep hold of part-time courses for rural areas. There is cross-party agreement that supporting skills development is a key driver to productivity in Scotland. Improving productivity is not only vital to business growth but is critical to enable employers to pay the living wage and for Scotland to remain competitive. We are all familiar with the Federation of Small Business Surveys that reports that a lack of skills is a barrier to business growth. Equally, the Commission for Developing Scotland's young workforce states that young people leave school ill-equipped to progress into the jobs market. Latest unemployment figures for Scotland are disappointing, stating that the jobless total is now 6.2 per cent compared with 5.1 per cent for the rest of the UK. With increasing unemployment and a skills gap, we must ask if our nation of young people will grow up never realising their potential trapped in low wages or unemployed leading to poor health and depression. In East Lothian, there is currently a mismatch of skills. 21 per cent of employers reported that their staff are not fully proficient. A large proportion of people work in elementary jobs such as customer services, care and leisure and skilled trade occupations. A priority therefore must be to ensure the demands of the East Lothian community are met and that workers have the skills that the community requires. It is therefore no surprise that just 18 per cent of people enter further education in East Lothian compared to the Scottish average of 24 per cent. Ian Wood's report talks about a world-class system of vocational education in which colleges work with schools and employers to deliver learning that is directly relevant to getting a job. An example? Yes, certainly. Would you recognise the comments that I made about leisure courses and not vocational courses? I think that you might have misheard me. I might have misheard you. I think that you were in quite a rush to deliver your speech because perhaps you had a time limit. However, I did specifically hear you mention the word services. Ian Wood's report talks about a world-class system of vocational education in which colleges work with schools and employers to deliver learning that is directly relevant to getting a job. An example of that is Erleston High School in the Borders, where S3-6s have a weekly lesson on employability skills called the learner journey, plus a meet the local employer speed dating session, which helps pupils to identify the types of skills required by employers. The report also makes numerous references to more young people in Scotland accessing college places and encouraging an uptake in vocational qualifications. The Scottish Government must encourage all schools to offer vocational choices in the senior face of the curriculum for excellence to tackle attainment inequalities. We have already heard today that 152,000 college places have been lost under the SNP Government. Part-time courses have been obliterated mainly to the detriment of women, people who need to work and students with care responsibilities. The SNP needs to stop reducing college funding and help further education providers to respond to the recommendations of the commission for developing Scotland's young workforce. Colleges are key to unlocking growth and contribute to £14.9 billion each year to the economy. That is 8.8 per cent of our total economic output. The importance of college places is all too clear and exposes the damage that the SNP Government has done to future generations. One could argue that the college funding cuts are a direct consequence of a free tuition policy. I cannot pass by the number of college places cut in STEM subject areas. On the SNP Watch, 30,000 courses in science, technology, engineering and maths have been slashed. Our economy is crying out for skilled engineers and a workforce to meet our digital era. I see that the Deputy Presiding Officer is getting her drumroll out at me, so I will conclude here and skip along. The time to act is now. At an act, we must. At the beginning of this Parliament. Ms Hamilton, you are not skipping anywhere. There is nothing to do with drumroll. I now call Tom Arthur, to be followed by James Dornan. James Dornan will be the last speaker in the open debate, so members should be back in the chamber for winding up speeches. Mr Arthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I shall be terse. I would like to begin by congratulating Shirley-Anne Somerville on her appointment. I very much welcome the Government's motion, recognising as it does the centrality of both FE and HE to building a fairer and more prosperous Scotland. As the first person in my family to go to university, I am keenly aware of what an immense privilege it is to live in a country where we have so many outstanding institutions and indeed of just how fortunate we are to have access to these fantastic institutions based on the ability to learn and not the ability to pay. The commitment to implement the recommendations of the Wading and Access Commission and to review support for both FE and HE students demonstrates that making sure Scottish education is a world class for all our young people is the central mission of this SNP Government. Many contributions in this debate recognise the role of our colleges and universities in driving the economy forward. However, as this debate also considers the broader success that our colleges and universities bring to Scottish society, I would like to focus on my remarks on another aspect of their contribution to society, both here and further afield, in empowering young minds and enabling critical thinking. I would like to share my pleasant surprise with the chamber that the amendment in the name of Liz Smith makes no explicit mention of the reintroducing tuition fees. Indeed, this is now the third Conservative amendment that was brought before us in recent weeks, but offers a rather different policy position to that set out during the election. I am sorry, but I am pushed for time. You can, if you like. You have got a minute's extra. I am pushed for time, but I want to get through. As we are in the midst—this is the third time—of the summer of international football, I do feel that it would be remiss of me not to congratulate the Tories on achieving a hat trick of climb downs before the summer recess. I will push on. Today, obviously, we are considering the work carried out by our colleges and universities, and is implicit in the Government's motion recognising the vital role of education in equipping our young people with the skills to find employment, start a business and contribute towards our economic future. However, it is important to recognise that the contribution that is made by our colleges and universities also goes beyond the training of a highly skilled workforce. It is now 200 years since Thomas Jefferson wrote that, if a nation expects to be ignorant and free and a state of civilisation, it expects what never was and never will be. Over the past few days, in considering what my contribution to this debate would be, Jefferson's words have come to my mind again and again. I must confess that those words for me have taken on the tone of a warning to heed, as it seems that we have approached troubled times. It is now over two decades since Fukuyama declared the end of history, since then it has become increasingly clear that our confidence in the triumph of liberal democracy across the western world was as misplaced as Hegel's belief in the durability of oppression and monarchy. In some parts of this island, this continent and beyond, there is the rising tide of intolerance, fear and mutual suspicion. If instance the rise to prominence of populists, demagogues and politician plutocrats who draw strength from ignorance and traffic and misinformation, the fruits of antiquity and the enlightenment, empiricism, logic, scientific method should be the common currency of all public discourse. However, as the late Carl Sagan once noted, too often the products of science have been accepted but not the method. To know what to think but not how to think is to have surrendered that which makes us human. Orwell was correct to observe that the greatest threat to liberty is, as he put it, not the gramophone record but the gramophone mind. Just as our economy depends on colleges and universities for a skilled and talented workforce, so our democracy depends on all of our educators and all of our educational institutions being robust defenders of free inquiry, articulate scepticism and liberty of expression. That is something that all other colleges and universities embody and it is an achievement that we should never fail to celebrate, we should be proud of and always acknowledge. I appreciate that some may regard such a remark as rather obvious, perhaps overstated and unneeded. It is easy, certainly, to take academic freedom for granted. It is easy to take the role that our colleges and universities play in ensuring that for granted. However, we must remember that many people who come to Scotland arrive from countries that were subject to the rule of tyrants in their own lifetimes. Against that backdrop and in the context of ever-increasing censorship across the world, our colleges and universities are progressive beacons. It is vital for their future, the future of other colleges and universities, that the freedoms that allow students from beyond their shores to study here are not jeopardised by those who value isolation over co-operation. Our colleges and universities have given so much to Scotland and to the world. Not only will they continue to be the central in driving forward economic growth and equipping our young people with the skills to compete in the jobs market of the future, they are formidable ambassadors for our country and our values. That is a good place to stop. Thank you very much. They are formidable ambassadors. You are well over time. I call James Dornan, please, last speaker in the open debate. As the SNP's nominee for the convenership of the cross-party group on education and skills, I am delighted to get this opportunity to take part in this debate. While we are so focused on making a fairer Scotland, it is right that, at the heart of it, it is education. Every child in Scotland, regardless of their background, deserves an equal chance to succeed in life. Children and young people are the building blocks to their future, and every single one should have a fair chance to move into further education and develop. Then, that will only benefit the Scottish economy long-term. Colleges play a vital part in the on-going journey to give our young people the best tools in order to succeed. In my city of Glasgow, we are fortunate to have three large colleges, Kelvin Clyde, which has a campus in my constituency in Langside, and the city of Glasgow. The city of Glasgow occupies more than 11 sites and secures £200 million of private sector funding and 25 years of funding from the Scottish Government. This super-campus is, in fact, probably Europe's largest, serving over 40,000 students. The college seeks to guarantee employability and prosperity to its students by maintaining more than 15,000 partnerships with prospective employers. It strives to be at the forefront of learning in the fields of technology and optical studies and industry, ensuring that the city of Glasgow and throughout Scotland have a workforce that is capable and ready to cope with economic challenges ahead. Glasgow is an example of what other colleges up and down the country are doing to ensure the best start in life for our young people. The hub model that colleges follow ensures that there is a vital and valuable link between the institution, schools and local employers. Colleges are a huge asset to adult learners—people who need retraining or, indeed, to enter into education and learning for the first time after many years out of high school. Many of those adult learners are, at the time of enrolment, unemployed or from one parent families, and college is an excellent resource to aid people into being able to re-enter the workforce. Reports have shown that college can be an excellent confidence builder in the bridge to taking many young people into university. I am proud of this Government's commitment not to introduce front-door tuition fees, as the Tories want, or back-door graduate taxes that Labour did before. Young people should be able to enter the workforce in adult life without the noose of thousands of pounds of debt around their neck, and for anyone to suggest that tuition fees are a means to closing the gap and attainment is complete madness. Why does he think that it was the right thing for his Government to replace maintenance grants with loans? Those are not loans in place when the Labour Party won government before, but surely what we have to do is work under the economic system that we have just now, and we have to make sure that we have the support structure that is the best in the UK for students in this country. The Open University, which has been sadly neglected in this debate today, is another example of the way in which the playing field for education and learning has been levelled. With the open entry policy, there are no formal entry requirements for most qualifications and modules. Some of the interesting old-use student stats that stood out to me are that 38 per cent live in Scotland, 40 per cent most disadvantaged communities, 64 per cent of new undergraduates earn less than 25,000, 70 per cent earn fuller part-time work, 15 have a disability, 40 per cent are studying STEM subjects, 44 per cent of those are female, 20 per cent don't have traditional university entry qualifications, and 15 per cent of new graduates come to the OU with a college HNCRD. There was lots to admire in the Open University and what that does is it makes it much easier for people to access further education. It means that instead of them having to go to university, they can do this, the university can come to them. Having studied the Open University before many years ago, I know of the benefits of it. Although all those statistics show that the university plays a vital part-level in playing fields, access to part-time learning is also another excellent tool. The flexible approach to learning means that many people who are in work but wish to change their role, those with families and those in the caring community can access learning on a timescale that best suits their needs. That encourages many who would in other circumstances find a barrier in accessing further education. It has been mentioned already that universities have a huge positive economic impact in Scotland and not only does further education play its part in providing Scotland with a future of well-rounded and skilled workforce that will contribute but have a great economic impact on the communities. In Glasgow, universities add £3.7 billion to the economy and employ 5,800 jobs. Nelson Mandela once said that education is the most powerful tool that you can use to change the world. If I am fortunate enough to become the convener of the Education and Skills Committee tomorrow, that is a phrase that will be at the forefront of my mind during the period that I am in that role. I move to winding up speeches. Monica Lennon is winding up for Labour Party's 26 minutes. Are there abouts, please? I welcome the minister to her place. Each time that education is discussed in the chamber, I find myself thinking back on my own learning journey. Only yesterday, I was in touch with my high school to congratulate them on a recent achievement. The work of the staff and students there continues to inspire me. Believe it or not, it is almost 20 years since the school gates closed behind me. I am sure that I may echo in my report cards when I say that, as a conscientious pupil at St John William High School in Hamilton, it was the guidance and encouragement of my teachers that helped me to find a path to university. I recognise the sentiments of Shirley-Anne Somerville and others when they say that they were the first in their family to attend university. Growing up, I always felt quite sad that, despite having the ability, nobody in my family had made that journey from school to university. Fortunately, a clutch of hires and a 20-minute ride on the 267 bus from Blantyre to the University of Stav Clyde gave me a ticket to becoming a successful learner and, later, into a profession where I hoped I was able to help communities. The opportunity to attend a university easily by public transport and live with family members in my hometown made higher education possible for me, along with some 12-hour night shifts in a local factory. I get that not everyone has a bank of mum and dad behind them. I get that travel and accommodation costs are a huge barrier for those with the least resources. I was pleased to hear that George Adam is still here, recognising the significant contribution that the University of West of Scotland contributes to widening access. I know that Paisley is the centre of George Adam's world, but I hope that he will not mind me mentioning that it is indeed a multi-campus university. Last year, when the UWS campus in Hamilton, the only university that was based in my region central Scotland, was facing a threat of closure and relocation to a place that was not easy to reach by public transport, I was horrified. In coalition with students, staff, residents, businesses, trade unionists and political figures, our local newspaper, The Hamilton Advertiser, became the platform for the Keep UWS in Hamilton campaign. I see Richard Lyle in his seat and I would like to thank Richard Lyle for joining the campaign without hesitation, without thinking about party lines and making it truly a cross-party effort. It was not about building a political campaign, for me it was highly personal. For people who know Hamilton well, in premiered your days, UWS Hamilton was Bell College of Technology, a gateway for lifelong learning, highly accessible, fantastic transport links with local businesses, and this remains the case today. We have talked about its role in widening participation, but what happened was that a bid to the Scottish Funding Council to regenerate the ageing campus was rejected, and that put the future diversity in our community at risk. Through a highly effective campaign, which allowed a pause in the process, I am pleased that a local solution to remain in Hamilton was reached. We have much to celebrate in this debate, and Shirley-Anne Somerville rightly acknowledges the world-class reputation of Scotland's universities for research. However, I come to points that Iain Gray made in relation to the current industrial action that is under way today and later this week. University College Union Scotland said this week that it is difficult to remain an exemplary teacher or world-leading researcher when you face the very real threat of losing your job or an annual basis. That is the reality of year-on-year real-term pay cuts. I echo Iain Gray's sentiment that staff are paying the price for budget cuts from the Scottish Government, and we should be using the powers in this Parliament to stop these cuts and invest in the HE and FE sector. Jamie Greene had the right diagnosis, so that student support is struggling to keep up with demand, but I do not think that anyone on this side of the chamber agrees with the prescription from that side. Ross Greer makes an important point on student support, particularly in terms of hardship over the summer. Just yesterday, I was speaking to Erin, a student teacher from Irvine, who describes her place at university as her golden ticket. She says to me that there is an assumption that all students can pack up their stuff and return to their family homes over the summer, where they will be looked after financially, practically and emotionally. That simply is not the case for everyone. UCAS figures show that the number of 18-year-olds from poorer backgrounds applying to university has dropped and the number of places offered has dropped even further. Quite simply, the vow is melting away. The rich are still benefiting the most. That is why, in this debate, the Scottish Labour amendment seeks to review student support across FE and HE. We should be committing to at least reversing the cuts that were made in the last session to grants and bursaries. We should introduce guaranteed level support for students in FE and we should protect FE and HE budgets for the duration of this parliamentary session. I thank you very much. I call on Ross Thompson to find out about Conservatives. I can give you eight minutes now. You do not have to use them, but you can, if you wish. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am honoured to represent a region with such a strong reputation for world-class education in pioneering research, whether it is the University of Abertau, a centre of excellence for computer games education and the first in the world to offer a computer games degree course, Robert Gordon's university, partnering with Oil and Gas UK to improve health and safety practices in the energy industry, the University of Aberdeen and their world-leading research in the field of life sciences. The staff and students of our universities and colleges deserve our most grateful thanks for the contribution that they make to our communities and to our wider economy. Further economic contribution is considerable. In Aberdeen City and Shire, the university and college sector accounts for over 16,000 jobs and adds over one billion to the local economy. Scotland-wide, the industry is a major exporter in its own right, bringing in over 450 million in student fees, over 450 million student spend in Scotland and over 400 million for research and innovation contracts every year. It also attracts foreign direct investment, helping Scotland to make the most of international opportunities. However, let us not forget the real impact that our colleges and universities can have on our communities, too. For example, the University of Aberdeen in partnership with Aberdeen City Council developed the Aberdeen Sports Village as a world-class facility for the north-east of Scotland, providing sport and exercise opportunities for students, schools and the wider community. However, universities are facing a challenging landscape. Earlier this year, the Scottish Government announced major grant reductions with both Aberdeen and Robert Gordon University in my region, having their cash cut by a crippling 3.9 per cent. In cash terms, that means that Aberdeen University is losing almost 3 million and RGU is nearly 1.5 million, a move that could lead to large-scale job losses as universities try to find ways to save cash. Our colleges, meanwhile, have not escaped the cuts either. A time of crisis in the north-sea energy industry, when retraining and trying to retain skills is essential, particularly in our schools, our colleges are shedding jobs and cutting places, with 152,000 places now lost since the SNP came to power in 2007. Colleges are telling us that their current funding settlement is unsustainable, putting many colleges in an extremely vulnerable position and to touch on a point raised by Iain Gray and his contribution. I agree with his remarks that, in relation to colleges being wholly within the public sector, it is naturally restricting their ability to commercially raise funds, to borrow funding and to put constraints on them, which has pushed a number of our colleges into operational deficits. It is crucial that we ensure sustainable funding to maintain what our colleges do day to day, providing people with the skills they need to be the workforce for the future and to take Scotland forward. To touch on a point raised by the minister in our opening statement and by my colleague Rachel Hamilton, I met colleges Scotland this morning, and they were telling me that they are seeking regional flexibility in order to better meet the local job market demands, so that they can have that flexibility in determining between part-time and full-time courses. No more clearly is as demonstrated in the north-east of Scotland in the current economic climate. On top of that, the much heralded transition training fund aimed at supporting those major dundant in oil and gas, those who want to retrain were relaunched again yesterday by the Government. I would like to know on behalf of my constituents why it has taken four months to get the fund up and running and why it took three months to set up a website to help those affected. To turn my attention to contributions made during the debate, we heard from Jenny Gilruth, a very good contribution, but, obviously, heralding free tuition in Scotland in making reference to St Andrews, though we know that the truth, of course, as with all Scottish universities, is that there are fees in Scotland comparable to England, which are being paid by international students and students from the rest of the United Kingdom. In relation to Jamie Greene, it was great to hear about his own experiences at school and college, and it was great to hear that his teachers are rightly feeling proud of him and, given that contribution, they should do. However, he touched on an important point, and that is the reality is that a student who is studying in a college course in Edinburgh will receive a different level of support to a student who is studying in Dundee despite studying the same course. To touch on a comment that was made by Julian Martin, I agree with her that partnership working needs to be recognised and that there are many positive destinations for our young people, which are not an arbitrary choice between college and university, but also include apprenticeships, and work experience, and also going directly into the world of employment. However, I would say that decisions of this Government have had an impact on colleges, the reduction of availability and choice, and that is having a negative impact on the positive destinations of many young people. I would like to congratulate my colleague Alexander Stewart on his maiden speech to this chamber. He may have had a checkered family pass, but clearly he has got a bright future ahead of him given that contribution. To touch on a comment that was made by my colleague Rachel Hamilton, she mentioned that the work that was undertaken by Serene Wood, I would like to congratulate him on his most recent awards. He absolutely deserves it, given everything that he has contributed to the north-east and wider Scotland. However, his report advised that it is best to ensure that pupils are prepared for work by ensuring that they are given vocational options, and that there is greater partnership and collaboration between schools, employers and colleges. We need to work to meet that challenge. I would like to congratulate James Dornan. I know that we have to wait until tomorrow, but I am sure that, when he is appointed as convener of the education committee, I look forward to working with him constructively in that new role. For those of us on those benches, education policy is one of our top priorities. In our universities, as Liz Smith has convincingly laid out, we believe that it is essential for them to remain competitive, as well as at the same time being required to widen access so that they can raise the income that is required to meet those challenges with a modest graduate contribution that is payable once graduates are in a good job. Perhaps the cabinet secretary at some point or in the Government in summing up can answer this, that if the Scottish Government is aiming to and going to widen access by 20 per cent to students from the most deprived areas, how will that be funded in the context of not seeking to squeeze out other students who are already studying? Our colleges, we want to support the case to boost funds, to provide more support for training and skills, and we believe that the SNP's college cuts from the last Parliament should be reversed immediately. Scotland should again be a beacon for first class education in the world. Remember, it was figures here in Scotland such as David Hume, James Watt and Adam Smith who, through the Scottish Enlightenment, helped to shape the modern world that we live in today. Members, in that tradition, show some enlightenment today and support the amendment in the name of Liz Smith. Thank you, Mr Thomson. I call on Jimmy Hepburn Minister to wind up please till five o'clock. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and at the outset I thank members for their various contributions. I want to begin my closing remarks by highlighting a point made by my colleague James Wigg. She said that the Government supports free access to education because we believe that education is a public good for our colleges and universities. This is about developing people's skills and nurturing innovation, which will not only allow them to grow individually but contribute to the creation of new sectors of employment. Jamie Greene, not his first contribution—I understand that it is certainly the first contribution that I have seen him make in this Scottish Parliament chamber, mentioned the positive role of his own experience of further education. James Watt's college had on his life. I certainly agree that further education and our colleges, Scotland's colleges, have a very important role to play. I believe that this Government has a strong track record in colleges. Over the term of the last Parliament, we maintained 116,000 full-time equivalent college places. We will continue this commitment, which is what we said we would do. We did it, which is what we are saying we will do now, going forward, and we will do it again. Rachael Hamilton, among other members, commented on the need to support part-time courses. I would readily concede the need for that. Of course, as Ms Somerville set out earlier, that this Government does support part-time courses geared towards on-going employment. Ms Hamilton also picked up on concerns about STEM courses at college. I thought that that was an interesting observation to make. Of course, it is the case that there are more than one-third more full-time equivalent engineering and science and maths students and colleges in 2014-15, compared with 2006-07. Again, in that regard, we have a strong record. We also have a strong record in supporting further education students. This year's budget of more than £106 million in college bursaries, childcare and discretionary, funds as a real-terms increase of 30 per cent since 2006-07. It is hugely tight financial times. Our budget for this year protects college resource funding at £530 million, providing certainty for, of course. In every previous year, there has been a shortfall in the budget for FE students' support, and in fairness, in every year, the Scottish Government has made a payment in year. Is he saying that that is not going to happen this year because the budget is so splendidly funded? I am certainly willing to concede that our budget is splendidly funded, Mr Greene. I think you make the point forward. Do you not, every year, when there has been a shortfall, this Government has met it and it has met its commitments to further education students rather at odds with the story that we hear from the Labour benches. We recognise that there is more to do in expanding the reach of our college sector. That work is under way, and it is beginning to bear fruit. Women's studying full-time courses are up by 16 per cent since 2006-07. We have also seen students with a recorded disability accounting for 16 per cent of all learning hours and an increase of 4 per cent of points since 2006-07. We are under way in expanding the reach of tertiary education. Liz Smith. I thank the minister for giving way. He is quite right about expanding the reach. Could I ask in terms of bursary support? There has been a modest improvement in Scotland about the level of that bursary support, but it is not as strong as it is in Wales, Northern Ireland and in England. Could I ask what the Scottish Government is going to do to address that? I have already set out our strong record of funding students at colleges in terms of the commitment of £106 million this year for bursaries in the range of support, but it is rather interesting, is it not? That is the debate about the contribution of colleges and universities to Scotland's success. It is interesting to hear the remarks from the Conservative benches about support for students. It would do well for the Conservative benches to reflect on what is happening across the entirety of the tertiary education sector under their control by comparison. What is happening here in Scotland contrasts to the United Kingdom Government, which are abolishing maintenance grants entirely for new students in England from Tweed 16-17. We will be increasing the grant element of our package for the poorer students by £125 in Tweed 15-16. We are maintaining free education. There has been much debate about the relative merits of free education. Incidentally, I cannot be the only member in this chamber who benefited by not having to pay tuition fees. It is always very interesting to hear those self-same members who benefited by that policy come to this chamber and say that today's generation of students have to pay tuition fees so that others can access education. Frankly, the statistics do not bear reality. We see a situation in the rest of the United Kingdom under Conservative control where students are now paying fees of up to £27,000 and accruing an average student loan debt in England of £21,180 by comparison to the Scottish position, where we have the lowest student debt in the entirety of the United Kingdom, so we will take no lessons from the Conservative benches in relation to our ambitions for supporting students in Scotland, of course. Ivers Hamilton It is a fallacy that higher education is free in Scotland in inverted commas, and it sugar-coated the word free. Is it coming at the cost to colleges and a cost to those in the poorest areas who are prevented access? I am happy to confirm for the member that I do not think that it is a fallacy that we have free education here in Scotland. I was very proud to vote for the reintroduction of free education here in Scotland by comparison to tuition fees of £27,000 south of the border. Let me move on a little, because I have been very delighted to accept the position of being the Scottish Government's Minister for Employability and Training. A key part of the focus of my work will be ensuring that we broaden access to employability and training. That will be a rigid focus of the work that I take forward. Indeed, this Government will be rigidly focused on ensuring greater attainment in education among underrepresented groups. We are looking at measures from the education system. We have school leavers from the 20 per cent most deprived areas of Scotland doing half as well as those from the most affluent areas. I am not by any stretch of imagination saying that the work in broadening participation education is complete. It is going to be important for our colleges and universities to play an integral role in tackling the challenges of broadening attainment. They should provide an accessible, seamless route for learners and reach into industry to create a skilled, employable future workforce. Those are the key aims of our youth employment strategy to develop in the young workforce, which has the same reduction of youth unemployment levels by 40 per cent by 2021. Again, there are considerable strengths to build on. The vast majority of students are leaving our colleges and universities to a range of positive destinations. As Shirley-Anne Somerville set out in her opening remarks, the number of Scottish domiciled higher education qualifiers from the country's most deprived areas increased by more than 2,300 from 8,035 in 2007 and 8 to 10,395 in 2014-15. As a minister who has brief straddles the economy and education portfolios, I will be working with our tertiary education sector to capitalise on its many successes in a number of areas. We have a very clear blueprint for achieving much of that through developing the young workforce. The Government's youth employment strategy our colleges and universities are central to developing the skills of Scotland's future workforce. The challenge is to ensure that those opportunities are of a high quality and available to all and to ensure that young people are well supported in the choices that they make. We are making some progress in broadening the reach of our tertiary education sector, but I recognise that there is more to do. That is something that the administration is absolutely committed to. To be clear, we can reflect on the fact that Scotland's colleges and universities provide a modern, responsive and valued part of our education and training system. The Government is committed to ensuring that everyone in Scotland has an equal opportunity to succeed and contribute. I hope that that is a commitment that is reflected across the chamber. I invite the chamber to join the Government in recognising the value of our colleges and universities and supporting them and Scotland's learners to build on their successes. I thank the minister and that concludes the debate on the contribution of colleges and universities to Scotland's success. As members may be aware, there has been a slight problem with our terminals or voting system. In order to resolve that problem, we are going to reboot the system before we move to the decision time. Can I ask all members to withdraw the cards and take the cards out of the terminals? The system will now be restarted. I ask all members to re-insert their cards and terminals. If members could just bear with us for a few more minutes, we will try to get an explanation to you shortly. I am sorry to say that the reboot did not work. I know that Mr Swinney is offered to put 50p in the metre, but that is not going to work either. I have thought about this and discussed it beforehand. We could have a roll call, but these take eight minutes per vote. I am going to use my power understanding order 11.3.3 to take the question on the motions and the amendments tomorrow. We can, however, move to members' business, and broadcasts can still operate the terminals, so we will now move to members' business.