The final item of business is a member's business debate on motion 11589, in the name of Kevin Stewart, on languages at the University of Aberdeen. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I would invite those members who would wish to speak in the debate to please press the request and speak buttons. I would take this opportunity to advise members that there will be one member who will make a section of his contribution in Gaelic, Dr Allan, and I intend to call him in due course, and I would advise that headphones are available at the back of the chamber for members who wish to listen to simultaneous interpretation of contributions in Gaelic. Members can listen by inserting their headphones into the socket on the right-hand side towards the front of the console, and any member unable to hear the interpretation should press the audio button on the console and select channel 1 in English. I am explaining this now to avoid a last-minute rush, which has been the position before. It is only a couple of sentences and you will be able to work it out from context, but I am very grateful if you wish to see that. Thank you, Dr Allan, for having spent that time explaining what members can do to listen to your words with a simultaneous interpretation, but I think that it is fair that that explanation is given at this stage. I now call on Kevin Stewart to open the debate around this, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I would like to start off by thanking everyone who signed the motion in order for it to be debated today. I welcome folks from University of Aberdeen, who are in the Public Gallery. I am proud of the University of Aberdeen, an institution that has enhanced my home city since 1495, bringing people from across the globe to study, to live and to work in the Granite City. I am proud that, nearly 30 years ago, I was the election agent for Alan McCartney, MEP, in his successful bid to become the rector of the University of Aberdeen. Since the announcement from the university about the downgrading of modern languages, I have thought about Alan a lot. Why, you may ask? Alan was a polyglot. He spoke at least six languages fluently and had an understanding of many others. He was born in Ghana, studied at the universities of Marburg and Tobigen, as well as Scottish universities, and he lectured at the then University of Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, before coming back to Scotland to work for the open university. Like me, he was proud of the University of Aberdeen, but like me, I do not think that the current situation would stand well with him. Let me be clear. There is a significant financial pressure on the University of Aberdeen and, indeed, on all of our universities. Years of Westminster austerity has taken its toll, and I am sure that the financial pressures have also taken a toll on the minister who will respond later. Yet, we must begin by acknowledging that language teaching is not a burden, a luxury to be sacrificed amidst austerity, but it is an investment, an investment in Scotland's prosperity by building our connections to the wider world. We do need to accept that we are here largely due to Brexit and the so-called hostile environment immigration policies with Britain turning its back on the world. Therefore, it is no surprise that students, including foreign language students, are turning their backs on Britain. The fall in overseas students is stark and the financial impact is real, and the UK Government does not seem to give a fig. In a similar vein, given that our own young people have lost free and easy access to the European Union, it is no surprise that a career in foreign languages is less attractive to them. The first steps that we need to take is to make languages more attractive to our young people. That should involve outreach into schools and engagement with students to highlight the opportunities that language degrees give. On the basis of what he has just said, is he concerned, like I am, about the reduction of numbers of students taking modern languages at that five in higher qualifications? I am, and that is one of the reasons why I have talked about outreach the way I have, because I think that we need to get over to young people the importance of language. Just recently, a study showed that those who spoke more than one language were less likely to get dementia and Alzheimer's. That is a public health issue that could be tackled by increasing the educational capacity. Importantly, we must not accept the hammer blow of Brexit. We need to give folk hope that, despite more challenging times, there are still excellent future career prospects in languages at home and abroad. Part of that is a vibrant research culture, which should attract the brightest and the best academics to Aberdeen and should provide the best grounding for teaching. A vibrant research programme is an attractive draw for many. That is not an easy path of simply accepting where things are and sacking teaching staff. It is the difficult path of staff, management, students and unions working together to build a brighter future for modern languages at Aberdeen. That will be challenging for management, who will need to look beyond today's low student numbers and therefore income, and they must look towards a more vibrant future of increasing student numbers. It will also be a challenge for staff who will need to pivot to outreach and engagement to sell the future of modern languages to prospective students, to enthuse, to enhance and to revitalise. Politicians, university management, academics and students must come together to fight the hostile environment immigration policies of the UK Government to open up our academic institutions to the world once more. Scotland has thrived because of the talent that we have attracted to come study, work and live here. Of course, their families should be welcomed too. I hope that the minister and the Scottish Government will rise to that challenge and join me and others in taking that fight to the UK Government. Presiding Officer, I have listened to management, academics and students on all matters. There has been disagreements about data, about the shortness of the consultation period and the lack of transparency in what has gone on. However, it is clear to me that no one wants to see modern language courses disappearing from the university perspectives. It is absolutely imperative that all parties come together, including the Government, to communicate, to debate, to reach agreement and find a way to adapt to ensure that any student coming to Aberdeen who wants to learn a language can do so, as they have been able to do, over the centuries of the university's existence. I thank my friend and colleague Kevin Stewart for securing this debate on languages at the University of Aberdeen this evening. Kevin Stewart said that the University of Aberdeen's academic routes date back to 1495, and the work of that institution in so many ways over more than 500 years has helped to connect our city to the world. The university's modern languages courses have been particularly helpful in building bridges and making those connections. The learning of other languages can allow us to share knowledge, to understand different cultures and to build friendships. Kevin Stewart mentioned the role of Brexit in his speech, and leaving the European Union already broke some of the bonds that connected us to Europe. It is sad that the impact that Brexit has had on modern language courses may undermine our connections with the world even further. While it is welcome that joint honours degree programmes in modern languages will continue to be available, the potential loss of a single honours degree is greatly disappointing. I expect that some of my Gaelic speaking colleagues will be keen to talk about the Gaelic course in particular, and I have to admit that it would make the scrutinising of the Scottish language bill somewhat bittersweet. That disappointment in the loss of single honours language degrees seems to have been shared by great many, by students, staff and even foreign dignitaries. A number of those folks have contacted me as their local MSP, and I have shared a range of insights into the university's proposals. One comment that I received this morning stood out, which explained the importance of languages degrees quite eloquently and distinctly. A language degree is not just language tuition, but involves the study of languages in their context, including study of their culture, society and region, which is a key requirement for students' critical understanding in the face of local and global societal issues. I met earlier today with Kirsty Miller, Charlotte Gorry, Kirstin Cos, Thomas Dargey and Lindsay Ryan from the university and who are also in the gallery this evening, and they expressed their concerns to me regarding the future of modern languages. They told me that currently no offer of a place has been offered to students for next year. The ones that have already applied are being told that there is no single honours degree course available. How will this impact the languages moving forward in the future? Where will the language teachers come from if we do not give genuine consideration of the future of modern languages? I sympathise greatly with the situation that the university finds itself in, and I do not envy the decisions that it will need to take in the months ahead. Among everything that has been said and that has been fed into the university's consultation, I know that there has also been offers of support and helpful suggestions. That constructive approach is something that I hope will continue and which I sincerely hope proves to be worthwhile. Whatever decision the university ultimately makes on the future of modern language provision, it will have wide-ranging impacts on folk's jobs, on students' academic prospects and on Scotland's place in the world. When a final decision is made, I would call on the university court to ensure that everything that has been said is fully taken into account so that they make the right decision that balances the challenges of today and the demands of tomorrow. I am glad that Kevin Stewart has brought this debate to the chamber, as it is a deeply regrettable situation on a number of levels. The key point was raised by many, but particularly by the UCU, who say that reducing the university's offer in modern languages is potentially damaging to the university, but also to our current students and future students and ultimately our global-facing nature in this country. There is no doubt that all of us would hope that all alternatives will be properly explored. Clearly, although universities must be completely independent of Parliament, I reiterate the hope that I have no doubt that we all share that it will follow all applicable legislation in relation to any redundancy consultations, as well as engaging in the constructive dialogue with the likes of the UCU and the student body. However, I think that it is important in the short time that I have been allocated to flag two aspects of the context and the drivers underlying the situation, particularly since the motion specifically flags the financial challenges, although Kevin Stewart is utterly misguided in the target of his ire. The higher education sector is staggeringly underfunded. Just recently, a report from the Scottish Funding Council that looks at the financial sustainability for all Scotland's universities suggested that, within two years, the sector's aggregate financial position will fall to a deficit of £3.3 million. The sector's total cash flow from operating activities as a proportion of all income will fall to just 4 per cent in 2023-24, and the sector's net liquidity days forecast to fall to £124 in 2024-25. Then there is the draft Scottish budget for 2024-25, which proposes cash cuts of almost 6 per cent to university resource budgets. Alistair Sim, director of university Scotland, said that this budget would impose a £28.5 million cut to teaching grants. What is even worse, Presiding Officer, is that, buddied deep in a supplementary spreadsheet to the budget is the news that there are now, quote, additional savings to be made in the higher education sector, including from reducing first year university places. We learned that Finance Committee just this morning translates to potentially at least 1,200 fewer university places available to Scottish students. Will I have time at the end? I hear the crocodile tears being cried from that side of the chamber. Does the member recognise the impact of his Government's budgetary decisions on the Scottish Government budget? I hear the chucking from behind him, but it's a straightforward question. Does he recognise the impact? Will he acknowledge, as Kevin Stewart has pointed out, the damaging impact of Brexit and his Government's immigration policies on the university sector in Scotland? This Scottish Government is sitting on the biggest block grant in devolution history, and he comes to this chamber and poses that. If the Scottish Government is going to leverage Scottish universities in the way that it is done so that it is so dependent on the international students, it is reaping the rewards of its appalling decisions. Presiding Officer, there is a wider issue here. Rianan Ledwell of the Aberdeen University Students Association, in a very helpful submission, told us that having a second language makes graduates more employable, and that is backed up by a report from the University of Cambridge in 2022, which said that widening access to languages education could be worth billions to the UK economy. Presiding Officer, a generation ago—a real generation, not an SNP generation—in 2004, the then Government removed languages as a compulsory subject. The result, according to HESA data, is a plummeting in the number of languages students in higher education. The numbers have been declining in their hundreds, year on year, for several years now, but that is not surprising. I refer to Pam Duncan Glancy's well-made intervention earlier on, because you see that the number of students taking hires in languages has plummeted by nearly 1,000 since 2017, and at that 5 by around 1,500 over the same period. That is the generation coming through without compulsory languages, and the results are clear to see. Presiding Officer, it stands to reason that, if you devalue languages at school in 2004, 20 years later, the harvest of that will be reaped at universities. Yes, it is deeply regrettable, the situation that the students, the staff and the University of Aberdeen find themselves in, but we must be clear about the factors underlying it and demand, as a Parliament, that the SNP Government rethink its draft budget, rethink its swinging cuts to the sector and drastically reconsider its position on the importance of languages in schools. Presiding Officer, I congratulate Kevin Stewart for bringing this motion to the chamber and on a personal note to warmly echo his praise of the late Alan McCartney MEP. I have doubtless told members before about how, in heady pre-Brexit days, I was once on a train between Luxembourg and Brussels. A man selling sandwiches was making friendly conversation as he made his way up the train. Although I could not follow a lot of what was being said, I could hear that he was speaking to his customers as required, fluent French, German, Dutch, English and Luxembourgish. My point is that multilingualism is normal around the world, monolingualism, by contrast, is unusual and yet, in the UK, we still look at things the other way around. It is deeply disappointing to see my alma mater, the University of Aberdeen, taking an apparent step backwards in its commitment to language degrees. Following the widespread backlash at initial proposals, I welcomed the University's commitment to developing new language courses, as well as continuing to provide additional and evening language classes and joint honours language degrees. However, I am not sure how any of that mitigates against the loss of single honours. On the other hand, I am sure that the University of Aberdeen will not be able to do that, but I am sure that the University of Aberdeen will be able to do that. The proposals run counter to the very idea of a university as a place where students come to realise in Teralia that the world does not operate solely in English. As has been alluded to since the founding of King's College Aberdeen in 1495, when its working language was Latin, French has also been taught, Gaelic has been studied in some form since these very early days, and since the 19th century, the university has offered a wide variety of degree courses in classical and modern languages. Indeed, German language professors in Aberdeen were among the voices calling for peace on the brink of the First World War. Since then, o tempira o mores, Latin and Greek have already retreated as have single honours courses in Italian and Spanish. However, meanwhile, the 1 plus 2 model has ensured the much wider roll-out of languages in Scotland's primary schools. I would certainly acknowledge the point that the university makes about the falling numbers taking language qualifications in secondary. That raises questions about what we do to encourage students to choose languages in the upper end of secondary and on to university. However, it is unclear to me how abolishing single honours language degrees is likely to strengthen language courses in schools, given their popularity with those looking to become language teachers themselves. Presiding Officer, I realise that this is a pet subject for me. I try to encourage the wider use of languages in this Parliament, not least in my own office. I hope that I am not about to overlook anyone in my staff's skills here, but between all of us in the office we manage Gaelic, Scots, English, Irish, Norwegian, Danish, French, Spanish and Italian. However, universities are independent of government, but I urge Aberdeen University to think again about what kind of university it wants to be and to listen to the voices of concerns that are being raised by its students, staff and graduates. I know my appreciation to Kevin Stewart MSP for securing its important debate tonight. As a member for North East Scotland, I share those widely held concerns about the future provision of language teaching at the University of Aberdeen. I have received many representations from constituents across the region, people who are being students at the University of Aberdeen and our current members' staff. They all know that the university plays a vital role in the city, but I cross the north-east both as an educator and as an employer. The support that is expressed by those students alumni in the wider community is testament to the excellent work of the modern languages department at Aberdeen. We still have 30 members of staff who still do not know whether their jobs are safe and UCU members are currently being balloted for strike action and action short of a strike. I thank the union for the representations that they have made to myself and other members in this regard. I urge the university and the unions to continue to engage constructively in order to deliver the best outcome for staff and students. Modern languages are absolutely vital for this country, for our economy and for our culture, as other members have already stated. There are huge benefits to being found in learning another language at both a personal and a professional level. It gives our young people the chance to study modern languages. It is one of the best investments that we can make in Scotland's future workforce. I thank Kevin Stewart for securing the debate. I think that we would diverge in part on the diagnosis of what has gone wrong. I think that his points regarding Brexit are very well made and certainly pertain to the problem in terms of international recruitment. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. It is a problem that has not really been swiftly resolved and never to be repeated. However, it is also not exclusively the responsibility of the university. It is the result of what Dame Sally Mapstone, as she was the convener of University Scotland, called the managed decline of the sector under this Government. Kevin Stewart was keen and rightly so to talk about the significant financial pressures that have come to bear on universities. We have to recognise that we have a funding model in Scotland that is broken for our universities, creating a wide array of perverse outcomes for our institutions, for our students, for our future and for our economy. The SNP's single failure to increase the unit of teaching resource paid to universities for Scottish students in 14 years means that institutions have become increasingly reliant on fees from international students, which means that there is a distinct lack of resilience. When external shocks such as those set out by Mr Stewart arrive in the form of Brexit or other market shocks—for instance, current shocks in the West African market, where there is a significant decrease just over this current academic year and the number of students coming to Scotland—our universities are uniquely exposed within those islands to those shocks, because it is the international students that pay for the Scottish students to learn here. The removal of Gaelic, as Dr Allan pointed out, from one of only four institutions in Scotland to offer such a degree is extremely worrying. We have to set that in the context of the concerns from the Gaelic community about the existential threat to their language and the ancient culture of our country. Much more—we have talked about this on numerous occasions in this chamber—has to be done to secure Gaelic, particularly in the Gaelic-speaking areas on the west coast, which is the homeland of the language, to make sure that we support the economy to make sure that that can happen. I would say that there is also limited recognition from the Scottish Funding Council as to the resource-intensive nature of teaching languages, a point that was made to me by the University of Aberdeen staff over recent days. Perhaps the minister might reflect on that in terms of the way that modern language teaching is treated. The university has cited low recruitment to undergraduate modern languages, but people have already pointed out that there is a particular challenge in relating to schools and the low uptake of modern languages in school, and a continuing and accelerating decline in that uptake. Across the country and particularly in the north-east, we face an acute teacher shortage with many posts advertised repeatedly and going unfilled. The number of modern language teachers is falling and recruitment to initial teacher education is also well down. Target is not being met in this regard. The Government has done precisely nothing, Presiding Officer, to arrest those trends of decline. The teacher education bursary is not available to modern language trainees. Funding for the 1 plus 2 languages programme, which was to be the Government's key to addressing the programme, has been wound down and there is absolutely nothing put back in its place. That is a downward spiral and very little at all has been done to correct it. The Government has to recognise that in this complex picture set out by members of Interactive. Will there be international issues? Will there be cultural issues? Will there be funding issues? The Government has a very key role and its responsibility is to recognise that and to take action to support the students, the staff and the university of Aberdeen, but all our modern language institutions and students across Scotland. I thank Kevin Stewart for securing this debate to which, as a former rector, of the University of Aberdeen, I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute. I want to begin by paying tribute to the staff and students in the school of language, literature, music and visual culture, especially those directly affected. To Aberdeen University Students Association, UCU and the other campus unions, for pulling together, for organising rallies, for contacting us and generally making a noise, I want to acknowledge your solidarity and determination in the face of very frustrating circumstances. I was pleased to speak at the rally on campus in December and to some folk outside Parliament at lunchtime today. Welcome to the gallery. Thanks to those who have been in touch with us prior to tonight's debate. I am just sorry that all of this has been necessary. I believe that the north-east of Scotland deserves and needs a comprehensive university, one that provides a full range of degree programmes, including single honours languages, one where university management treats staff and students with respect and kindness, professionalism and care, and one where different parts of the university support others as part of a larger, stronger whole. Cutting modern languages, closing single honours programmes is a very bad move. First, for reputation. Without modern languages and single honours programmes, Aberdeen University is no longer a comprehensive university. It sends exactly the wrong message for communities across the north-east and northern Scotland generally. I believe that the integrity of the institution is at stake. It has a civic duty to Aberdeen and the wider region to be that comprehensive institution, a duty that it will fail to fulfil. Of course, the impact on staff and student morale, never mind the job losses that they are contemplating. What is so easy to shatter will take a very long time to rebuild. While it is low, there will be knock-on consequences for recruiting and retaining staff and students. The whole process also leaves a lot to be desired, as we have heard. It has been described as inaccessible and disempowering. All of this affects the region more generally. Promoting language education across the north-east, training the next generation of language teachers for our schools, is so very much needed. Languages, programmes and teaching should be supporting the education of linguists and others who we want and need to make their lives in the north-east. I fear that it will be very hard to sustain teaching languages at all, if not as degree programmes but just as joint honours or nice to have extras to other studies. Aberdeen University was the only place north of the central belt where one could do language courses across such a range of languages. Losing that will be very hard to recover. In terms of financial strategy, and we agreed this when I chaired the university court as rector a few years ago, you cannot cut your way to growth. These cuts are short-sighted and we know that once these kinds of things are gone, they are gone. I also believe that individual budget lines are not appropriate ways to account for value across the whole institution. I believe that it is right that some parts of the university should subsidise others. If teaching single language honours degree programmes is seen as a financial problem, I would suggest that there are broader issues for the institution to consider. Finally, I must highlight the value of modern languages in all aspects of life for our social and cultural understanding and enrichment. Languages are about so much more than just words in a different language. If we are to deal with the global crises we face, we need more understanding of different cultures and societies, not less. We know that language teaching is vital to decolonising the curriculum. We should be doing everything that we can to not reinforce English as the hegemonic language. We must continue to fight for modern languages at Aberdeen University, for modern languages themselves, for the university as a whole, for the region and for our country. As a graduate of the University of Aberdeen, I thank Kevin Stewart for bringing the issue of the future of modern languages provision at the University of Aberdeen for debate, a time-ious debate given that we will celebrate Languages Week Scotland later on this month. Like Kevin Stewart and other colleagues, I, too, have engaged with individuals and organisations concerned about the proposal, particularly I thank Rhianon Ledwell of the Students Association for her tenacity and the university principal, Professor George Boyne, for his openness and engagement on the matter. I commend the work of the steering group led by Professor Leigh Decker and welcome the decision of the university court to continue to offer joint honours degree programmes in languages for now, but disappointingly not single honours degrees. I echo many of the concerns already raised by members this afternoon, the implications surrounding equal access to language education in the north of Scotland, recruitment and training of language teachers in the north east and the reputational impact to the university and wider Scottish higher education. I note the university's analysis in its consultation paper that the provision of modern languages is not viable in its current form, but why? I was dismayed to note in the consultation document that steeply falling enrolment is a long-term UK-wide trend, despite national initiatives over many years, to increase the uptake of language learning in school and by extension at universities. In recent years, we have seen a 57 per cent drop in higher and A-level entries in German and a 44 per cent drop of entries in French and a 34 per cent drop in higher education entrants nationally since just 2015. While preparing for today's debate, I noted with interest a comment in the foreword of a modern languages excellence report that had been published by the national centre for languages. I quote, "...unless a decline in modern languages learning is reversed, Anglophone Britons will become one of the most monolingual peoples in the world, with severe consequences for our economy, for business competitiveness, for international reputation and mobility and for community cohesion at home. All issues that have been raised by members already." We know the benefits in promoting additional languages and their importance in equipping the next generation of workers in Scotland and beyond with the necessary skills to contribute and compete in an increasingly globalised society. Scotland benefits from having a workforce fluent in multiple languages, be that through bringing in investment opportunities or addressing the job market demand for multilingual speakers. As a north-east MSPI, I specifically note the importance of having an energy workforce comprised of bi or multilingual speakers to help to realise the Scottish Government's ambitions of becoming a global energy hub. There are so many more examples that we could refer to this afternoon. How do we encourage more school-aged children and young people to learn modern languages and continue to hire education learning? The Scottish Government's 1 plus 2 approach aims to ensure that every child can learn one modern language and, additionally, that each child is entitled to learn a second language from P5 onwards. The opportunities for early learning seem to be there. The question is why is the uptake so challenging and what can be done to reverse the trend of diminishing interest in languages beyond curriculum for excellence? As Kevin Stewart said, how do we make learning languages more attractive? I note the huge range of work across Scotland to promote languages, including the work of the Scotland's national centre for languages that supports parental participation in learning, languages in the workplace, study and work abroad and a range of other activities. However, more broadly there seems to be a need for a more co-ordinated approach involving Government, local authorities, education institutions, industry and business. In that regard, I would be interested to hear from the Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to turn the worrying trend around. I have enjoyed listening to the insightful contributions that are made in the chamber today on the subject. I agree with colleagues that it is crucial that every effort is made to secure the continuity of modern languages' provisions at the University of Aberdeen, but that significant challenges exist around that. Again, as Kevin Stewart highlighted, teaching languages is an investment. I will continue to lend my support to the University of Aberdeen. It is teaching staff and students to ensure that the north-east still has access to modern languages' course provision in a way that is not detrimental to the university, staff or students. I thank you again to Kevin Stewart for bringing that debate forward today. I now call on Minister Graham Day to respond to the debate on behalf of the Scottish Government. Around seven minutes, please. Many thanks, Presiding Officer. Let me begin by extending my gratitude to Kevin Stewart for table on this debate and to members for their insights. In a broad sense, the debate is a timely one ahead of Languages Week Scotland, which will take place from 29 January to 22 February. We will celebrate how languages, spoken and signed, equip us as individuals and as a society to contribute to a sustainable world. Members have highlighted a range of perfectly valid concerns about the proposals that have been put forward by the University of Aberdeen to change its languages provision. I have also listened carefully to the range of educational, societal and economic benefits of language education and the particular importance of language learning and teaching in the north-east that have been highlighted. We must be clear that all universities are autonomous institutions, and as such, they are responsible for their own course provision, and it is for them to decide how to distribute their allocation of funded places between faculties and courses. With that said, I have encouraged the university to carefully consider its proposals, and I have stressed my expectation that the university adheres to fair work principles, which I think Liam Kerr alluded to. That includes the need for meaningful consultation and constructive dialogue with staff affected by those proposals. My expectation is that compulsory redundancy should only be considered as a last resort after all other cost-saving measures have been fully explored. I will return to that, Presiding Officer. I am pleased to hear the minister talk about fair work there and that there should be no compulsory redundancies unless there are no other options. I recognise the autonomy of the university and the fact that the minister has no say or sway over the institution. However, he has got some good offices and a listening lug, as we would say in the north-east. I know that he has met many folk already. Will he agree to continue to do that and to try and find compromise and common ground that makes sense for all in the north-east? As I said, Presiding Officer, I want to return to the points that I made earlier if Kevin Stewart will indulge me. No one, not least of all the university itself, wants to be in a position where it has to consider measures such as those that are proposed. However, I do not think that any reasonable person could look at the cold hard facts and fail to recognise that the University of Aberdeen has a problem here. Across five single honours courses for the academic year 23-24, just five new students enrolled, maintaining a downward trend over a number of years, which has seen the student numbers on modern language courses at the institution fall from 62 to 46 to 27 since 2021. The university has further outlined the financial challenges that it is seeking to address through its proposals, although I recognise that some of the underlying numbers that have been quoted are disputed by the staff. Although it is for the University of Aberdeen to develop its own mitigating strategies to minimise any negative impacts on short, medium and long-term financial sustainability, where individuals' institutions are facing particular pressures, the Scottish Funding Council always engages in where possible and offers support. I want to remind the chamber that, despite an exceptionally difficult fiscal environment, we can go back and forth on the cause of that. In the latest budget that we, the Scottish Government, have committed to supporting a high-quality post-school education research and skills system with over £2.4 billion of investment, we will work in partnership with our universities to develop the offering that is available. Ultimately, it is for individual institutions to determine where and how they deploy their resources at their disposal. That said, I met this afternoon, if I can just make progress on this. That said, I met this afternoon, where I am in wedwell, the Aberdeen University Student Association Vice President for Education. I was concerned to learn that the steering group, which is leading on this, contains no student representation. I understand that staff representation from the impacted faculty is only marginally better. Therefore, I will be asking the University of Aberdeen to reconsider that stance, because it is important that all views are heard and maximum transparency is at play around decisions as impactful as they are. I will also ask the university to reflect upon whether all credible alternative options to the one now being pursued have been fully explored. If you may reiterate, those are matters for the institution, not ministers. However, it might be regrettable that the live proposal is the only viable one to address the financial issue that is at play here. However, it is important to demonstrate clearly why and how that might ultimately be the case, even if that takes a little bit more time. Michael Marra. I am grateful to the minister for giving way. One institution that works for ministers is the Scottish Funding Council, which dispersed the money. Part of the issue that was laid out to me by staff at the University of Aberdeen was about the fact that the languages are not deemed to be, as a resource intensive, a programme of some other courses. That is a change that perhaps the minister might recommend, or at least investigate, with the Scottish Funding Council, whether language courses could be treated in a way that is more akin to a lab-based form of education rather than a lecture-based form of education, given the intensity of it. Is that an area that the minister would take into account? With respect to Michael Marra, he can call for that, but he also has to recognise that, if that were to be pursued, that money would have to be found from somewhere else in the higher education budget. He is perfectly entitled to call for that, but he will surely recognise that that has a price for the budget somewhere else on other aspects of higher education. As a motion recognises, we cannot ignore the damaging impact that Brexit, along with the UK Government's hostile approach to immigration, has had on Scotland's ambitions for an inclusive, outward-looking society. International students bring diversity to our communities, enrich the learning experience of our institutions and enhance our economy. Our message, Presiding Officer, should be clear—you are welcome in Scotland. Whilst we will continue to work with the UK Government to address the shortfalls of the touring scheme, the Government remains committed to mitigating the loss of access to Erasmus Plus, including the on-going work to develop our Scottish education programme, the pilot schemes for which are being launched as we speak. We have also engaged closely with key stakeholders, including our universities to prepare an international education strategy, and I expect to launch that in the next few weeks. The strategy will promote Scotland's education offer globally and attract a diversity of students to our institutions. However, it is deeply unfortunate to say the least that we are having to mitigate the folly of Brexit and a hostile immigration policy. However much the Conservatives want to deflect, both are having a massive impact on our HE sector. I thank the minister for taking this intervention, and in the time that we have taken to get in Scotland a pilot scheme set up, the minister will be aware that Wales has undertaken several exchanges. Does the minister have any understanding or analysis of the lost time in creating that scheme and the impact that it has on modern languages in Scotland? I thank Pam Duncan-Glancy for a typically positive contribution. We are where we are. We are developing our scheme. I say generally that it is Pam Duncan-Glancy. I know that Wales faces some challenges around the continuation of their scheme in its current form. I do reiterate this point. If the Conservatives and Labour are minded to increase funding to HE, and they are perfectly entitled to do that, they have to set out from where that funding should come, either from within the Scottish Government's education budget or the wider budget. Ditto, Michael Marra, if he wants specific additional resources for language. I am clear that, in taking forward any of its proposals, I expect the university to adhere to fair work principles and ensure that consultation with staff and student is meaningful. I make every effort to protect jobs, recognising that, ultimately, it may not be entirely possible to protect jobs in the way that people would like. I also expect them to be open to exploring viable and constructive alternative proposals, if such exists and are being preferred, albeit of course working to a timetable that reflects the need to conclude this rather than it being open at the end. Meanwhile, in line with our reform agenda for the post-co-education and skills system, the Government will continue to work with the University of Aberdeen and the wider university sector to ensure longer-term sustainability and deliver the best outcomes and impacts for learners, the economy and society.