4. To ask the Scottish Executive what the implications are for local access under the regionalisation approach proposed for the further education sector. (S4O-00311)

We are currently consulting on the prospect of a regional alignment of the college sector. Only after we have closely considered the responses to the consultation will we be in a position to reach a final view about its future shape. However, we regard continued local access to further education as of key importance.

Many of the people I represent have lost out through community campus closures that have already taken place. How will the minister address concerns about a potential increase in travel, added childcare time and its cost and the accessibility needs of the most disadvantaged people affected by rationalisation?

I do not see how Anne McTaggart can know who will be affected by this approach, because I have just made it clear that we are consulting on regionalisation. Indeed, I told the principals this morning that nothing is cast in stone and that I was looking to hear proposals and ideas from the colleges about how best this would work. I also stress—I stressed it in my first answer and will do so again—that local access is of strong importance. Although regionalisation should certainly reduce the overheads and the bureaucracy and, I hope, make the organisations more responsive, I see no reason at all why it should reduce local access.

Anne McTaggart raises the issue of access. Does the cabinet secretary accept that there is a significant difference between the SNP’s manifesto pledge to maintain student numbers and its pledge to the National Union of Students Scotland and to students to protect college places, and will he say which promise the Scottish Government will keep?

No, I do not.